>2. "cellular processes are ... irreducibly complex" in that "gradual, step-by-
>step evolution of the process would not work, for none of the intermediate
>stages would be "selected" because none of the intermediate stages would
>be functional."
Chris
This is essentially irrelevant to Darwinian evolution. It's the same old
idiocy of claiming that there is no route at all between two cities if
there is no *straight-line* route, or that, if there is no entrance to a
building on the side we happen to see, then there must be no entrance at all.
>3. "recent research in information theory...concludes that random mutations
>cannot create complex, biologically-specified genetic information."
Stephen, you shouldn't believe just *anything* you read that happens to be
oriented toward supporting your views. Get a grip, man.
The claim is simply false, unless the research is fatally flawed. Not only
is it false in information-theory terms, it's also false in mathematical
terms; it is mathematically disprovable.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 29 2000 - 13:37:17 EDT