I’m not an expert so, to some extent, I depend on others to do some of the “reviewing”. I’ve read some of what Drs Behe and Dembski have written and I have read some of the criticisms of their work and I don’t think the case has been proven . . . yet.

And if some new research that has greater support behind it points towards an intelligent designer then I shall be ready for a paradigm shift!

So ella, what kind of evidence would cause you to change your opinion?

Cant make out what David Abel is saying one day ’cause it don’t fit your way of thankin, then snappity-snap-snap back the next day pulling out TO quotes like it wuz ez pickins

Hit us with some more of them smilies!

“Chromosome counts are poor indications of similarity; they can vary widely within a single genus or even a single species. The plant genus Clarkia, for example, has species with chromosome counts of n = 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 14, 17, 18, and 26 (Lewis 1993). Chromosome counts in the house mouse species (Mus domesticus) range from 2n = 22 to 40 (Nachman et al. 1994).

Chromosomes can split or join with little effect on the genes themselves. One human chromosome, for example, is very similar to two chimpanzee chromosomes laid end to end; it likely formed from the joining of two chromosomes (Yunis and Prakash 1982). Because the genes can still align, a change in chromosome number does not prevent reproduction. Chromosome counts can also change through polyploidy, where the entire genome is duplicated. Polyploidy, in fact, is a common mechanism of speciation in plants.”

HTH

We’re always going to come to this impasse: I think that once you have a self-replicating molecule that sometimes makes mistakes then eventually you can get all the life we see and know of. I agree that it’s the initial step (or steps) that are the essential first rung and I think that must be a fascinating area of research to be involved with: how could that first molecule have got started. I can see everything else coming from that through a process of natural selection; we are talking millions and millions of years!! And I think we will always differ on that point.

So, I won’t try and convince you of my view but I shall continue to try and understand and appreciate yours. And if some new research that has greater support behind it points towards an intelligent designer then I shall be ready for a paradigm shift!

And I shall try and be less snarky. But I do like asking questions . . .

What proof is there that, say, 500 million years ago there was an intelligent agent around aside from gaps in the fossil record?

The presence of biological information, digital code and specified information necessarily present before the first cell can even get off the ground, best explained by a conscious being, i.e., an intelligent designer. Once one studies the alternatives, that is the “only causally adequate explanation.”