ohh, one more thing. i cant find the source at the moment, but i read a few years back that most women will have over a dozen miscarriages in thier lives that they wont even know about , as it never gets beyond a couple of weeks, due to deleterious mutations and combinations.
On Dec 19, 2007 12:54 PM, OrionWorks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thomas sez: > > > The Cruncher's point being that there aren't enough seconds, > > throwing the dice once per second, over the past 15,000,000,000 > > years to have tried all the potential combinations. And that's > > just for the first genome. Stanford's point is that the system > > is deteriorating, it's evolution in reverse > > And Stanford's point being? > > Trying "...all the potential combinations" is not the goal for which > the theory of evolution was ever based on, never was. All that is > necessary is to stumble into combinations that work better than the > previous set of combinations. That's doable. The process doesn't take > a million jillion years of dice throwing. If Stanford can't comprehend > that very basic point what are we to make of his basic grasp of the > theory of evolution? > > An old friend of mine, Richard, (from another group) described the > process, a highly simplified variation, as follows: > > ... > > > But seriously, folx. While MUTATION may be random, NATURAL > > SELECTION is anything but, a fact that seems to have been > > totally lost on the neo-creationists behind "intelligent" > > design. > > > > Think about this. You're rolling 5 dice, with the object of > > getting the highest score possible. You're allowed a maximum > > of 4 rolls. For each roll, you're allowed to set aside dice > > that you're happy with and only re-roll the rest. > > > > * Roll A: 6, 5, 3, 3, 1 = 18 -- set aside the 6 > > * Roll B: 5, 4, 2, 1 -- don't set any aside > > * Roll C: 6, 5, 1, 1 -- set aside the 6 and the 5 > > * Roll D: 4, 2 -- you're stuck with these > > * Final Score: 6, 6, 5, 4, 2 = 23 (out of a max of 30) > > Anyone studying deadly bacterial strains and antibiotics knows the > consequences of that process all too well. > > Regards, > Steven Vincent Johnson > www.OrionWorks.com > www.zazzle.com/orionworks > > -- That which yields isn't always weak.
