Natural selection is a conservative process not a creative one.
Discover Interview: Lynn Margulis Says She's Not Controversial, She's Right
It's the neo-Darwinists, population geneticists, AIDS researchers, and English-speaking biologists as a whole who have it all wrong.
And you don’t believe natural selection is the answer?
This is the problem I have with neo-Darwinists: They teach that what
is generating novelty is the accumulation of random mutations in
DNA, in a direction set by natural selection. If you want bigger
eggs you keep selecting the hens that are laying the bigger eggs, and
you get bigger and bigger eggs. But you also get hens with defective
feathers and wobbly eggs. Natural selection eliminates and maybe maintains, but it doesn’t create.
and…
I was taught over and over again that the accumulation of random
mutations led to evolutionary change — led to new species. I believed
it until I looked for evidence. …
There is no gradualism in the fossil record… ‘Punctuated equilibrium’ was invented to describe the discontinuity. …
The critics, including the creationist critics, are right about their criticism. It’s just that they’ve got nothing to offer but intelligent design or ‘God did it.’ They have no alternatives that are scientific.
The evolutionary biologists believe the evolutionary pattern is a tree. It’s not. The evolutionary pattern is a web…
3 comments:
"Natural selection eliminates and maybe maintains, but it doesn’t create"
---------------------------
That also goes for adaption , breeding, and mutations. There is no evidence that one kind of animal turned into another over time. These processes can cause a variety, in humans for example, but there are no almost humans or are there ex-humans. Nothing else has come from man.
-------------------
"The critics, including the creationist critics, are right about their criticism. It’s just that they’ve got nothing to offer but intelligent design or ‘God did it.’ They have no alternatives that are scientific."
----------
What if a creator said he did create by using one life to create another? You would have the precedent that, he did at least say he used that method.
This is explained more fully from my Patterns of Creation.found here
http://patternsofcreation.weebly.com/
Now many scientists say they have found history of life in studying the genes of populations over time. Would this not be similar to, programmers reusing and building programs from earlier code. Something like operating systems, that run many other programs. With the combination of intelligent breeding and creating one life from another, would that also show efficiency of design? If you are going to build many different kinds of animals, why would you start from scratch each time? This in itself supports a creator. Scientists are doing this same procedure today.
I constantly emailed this web site post page to all my contacts, for the reason that if like to read it then my friends will too.
Hey very nice blog!
Post a Comment