Let me try to explain my quandary over your charge that I’m using a strawman. First, it’s a deceptive tactic used to discredit another’s position. Second, it’s a substitution of the main postulate with another that is easy to discredit. My intention in introducing the SE discussion was not to discredit Evolution, but to understand how Evolution can work when it APPEARS to violate some fundamental tenets of SE that are proven and widely accepted by rocket scientists like myself. My explanation of SE was correct, but it also implied a rigidity that clearly clashes with Evolution as you guys know it. It was never intended as a substitute to be used to discredit your beliefs. Rather it was introduced so you could understand my perspective and could help me navigate toward an understanding of Evolution that you have. You have done a good job in leading to that understanding. though you’re a bit grumpy and seem to take my inquiry as a personal attack on your beliefs. I’m not attacking anyone, and have not intention of doing so. I just want to understand your thinking. Seeing how the SE paradigm is interpreted within an evolutionary framework is helpful in guiding me to an understanding of your views. So in my view, it wasn’t and still isn’t a strawman.
Regarding my question about you “begging the question” when you claim that every time an animal has offspring, it proves me wrong, i.e., that the SE concept that requires coordinated change across all the components that contribute to that function. You’re assuming that you are correct (SE principals are not needed) to prove you are correct. You claim that every time an animal gives birth, it proves me wrong. Maybe I’m not smart enough to follow your logic, but it sounds like the fallacy, i.e., you’re right because you’re right.
Notwithstanding, I’m learning from you guys and it’s helping me better understand your thinking which is my goal. And I’m enjoying it. Most of all, I appreciate your patience. Who knows, you may in the end win me over to EC.