why are you so sure about your claims, then?
Because I trust the professionals in the fields mentioned above. When they say that probabilistically, neutral drift and population genetics can account for complexity, and can show their work (I can’t show you their work, but I don’t think they are lying, and I don’t believe there is a massive conspiracy theory, nor do I think it is a philosophical issue), I believe them.
Then there is the not so minor detail that I don’t believe God wants us to have scientifically demonstrable proof of his existence.
3 Likes
i wish my teacher used that standard when asking me to show my work 
1 Like
Regarding claims and evidence, what is the best experimental evidence or finding supporting the hypotheses and models of ID? Anything observable?
No you don’t. You wouldn’t be what you are today if they did.
axe and ewert have some pretty interesting papers
also, lots of mainstream evidence in textbooks, especially at the graduate level, if you ignore the evolution kowtowing veneer
well then i say take the same approach to your own hypotheses about evolution
Thank you so much.
You ignored my last point above.
If we’re talking about complex biological features, do you see that it is begging the question to assert that these biological features are naturally occurring, when that is the very question that is under discussion?
1 Like
You’d better explain why they’re interesting because I haven’t seen anything of interest in their papers that I’ve seen.
By all means present some of this evidence.
1 Like
Is this begging the question, or are you?:
romans says tge evidence leaves everyone without excuse
if there is no scientofic evidence that sounds like a pretty huge excuse to me, especially since scientofic knowledge is one of our most certain and general forms of knowledge
i’m curious why you think God would want such a state of affairs
1 Like
Could you refer me to one that can be accessed that you like?
1 Like
off the top of my head, the graduate functional genomics textbook by pevsner i read said the majority of the human genome is functional, in that it codes for proteins. seems pretty inexplicable on a darwinian point of view
We are talking about scientifically demonstrable evidence. Can you prove God’s existence through his providences?
i am a huge fan of the dependency graph of life by ewert
i have a python script that demonstrates the paper’s point about the fallacy of the phylogenetic signal, soon to have pretty pictures!
that i am not sure
but i think we can at least do a lot better than darwinian evolution
therein lies the debate about what faith is
i think it means choosing to follow reason, even if we don’t like the conclusions