Originally posted by @kazetnagorraLike I said if you can not talk about it, it's okay.
In that case:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geology
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by @wolfgang59Evolution results in progress; organisms are always getting better through evolution.
No.
Google it.
Thanks to google.
Originally posted by @dj2beckerActually, that is a misconception. Third on the list here:
Evolution results in progress; organisms are always getting better through evolution.
...
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/misconceptions_faq.php
Originally posted by @dj2beckerNope. Mutations alter DNA. The expression of DNA in the phenotype leads to natural selection.
Do mutations not 'systematically improve' a specie according to evolutionary theory?
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraSo is natural selection an intelligent or dumb mechanism?
Nope. Mutations alter DNA. The expression of DNA in the phenotype leads to natural selection.
Originally posted by @dj2beckerIt is neither "intelligent" nor "dumb;" it is a phenomenon that occurs in nature such as rainfall and sunlight.
So is natural selection an intelligent or dumb mechanism?
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraEvolution may be more intelligent than we thought, according to researchers. In a new article, the authors make the case that evolution is able to learn from previous experience, which could provide a better explanation of how evolution by natural selection produces such apparently intelligent designs.
It is neither "intelligent" nor "dumb;" it is a phenomenon that occurs in nature such as rainfall and sunlight.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151218085616.htm
Originally posted by @dj2beckerA very poorly written article.
Evolution may be more intelligent than we thought, according to researchers. In a new article, the authors make the case that evolution is able to learn from previous experience, which could provide a better explanation of how evolution by natural selection produces such apparently intelligent designs.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151218085616.htm
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by @wolfgang59Says the ad hominem king. Is that the best refutation you have?
A very poorly written article.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
1 edit
Originally posted by @wolfgang59I'm guessing the article would have been well written if it supported the notion that natural selection is a non-intelligent process, which would fit in nicely with your comfortable atheistic beliefs?
A very poorly written article.
Originally posted by @dj2beckerDoes the article fit with your creationist beliefs? Do you think it's well written?
I'm guessing the article would have been well written if it supported the notion that natural selection is a non-intelligent process, which would fit in nicely with your comfortable atheistic beliefs?