you're the one relying on faith in random mutation of the gaps claims
If you really believe that, then we know for sure you are just blowing more magical smoke & just naysaying which is not providing any alternative to the origin of species. The basic process of evolution is "descent with modification and natural selection", in other words, a gradual reproduction. The process of Natural selection is quite explicit, if the mutation is a good one, in some 40 generations, it will be the dominant mutation. If a bad one, the animal or plant carrying it won't live long enough to pass it to the next generation.
So called "intelligent design" describes no process whatsoever, because the notion of common descent seems to be so rock solid, if "ID" really happened, then it must be added as one of the many mutation processes, but as to what this mystery process of ID actually is we find you don't seem to want to talk about that?
If you want to use a comparison between DNA and software, that's fine,have fun, knock yourself out. However, that analogy is only a functional comparison that works regardless if you think DNA evolved or was designed. Trying to use the nature of software to show that something could not evolve is well past the useful level of the analogy so you're just wasting time producing a silly equivocation for what doesn't just appear but built up incrementially. |
