Don't tell me there's no proof for evolution

spe·cies
ˈspēsēz,ˈspēSHēz/Submit
noun
1.
BIOLOGY
a group of living organisms consisting of similar individuals capable of exchanging genes or interbreeding. The species is the principal natural taxonomic unit, ranking below a genus and denoted by a Latin binomial, e.g., Homo sapiens.

Species
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see Species (disambiguation).

The hierarchy of biological classification's eight major taxonomic ranks. A genus contains one or more species. Intermediate minor rankings are not shown.
In biology, a species (abbreviated sp., with the plural form species abbreviated spp.) is the basic unit of biological classification and a taxonomic rank. A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms in which two individuals can produce fertile offspring, typically by sexual reproduction. While this definition is often adequate, looked at more closely it is problematic. For example, with hybridisation, in a species complex of hundreds of similar microspecies, or in a ring species, the boundaries between closely related species become unclear. Other ways of defining species include similarity of DNA, morphology, or ecological niche.

All species are given a two-part name, a "binomial". The first part of a binomial is the genus to which the species belongs. The second part is called the specific name or the specific epithet (in botanical nomenclature, also sometimes in zoological nomenclature). For example, Boa constrictor is one of four species of the Boa genus.

The point is that a recombination of two different genomes leads to new text. Imagine that an editor mixes by mistake two tragedies from Shakespeare: one verse from Macbeth, one verse from the Midsummer Night Dream, etc. Among much bizarre jibberish, one could perhaps find an interesting quatrain or two.

But nothing can 'prove' ID, in the sense that nothing, even in science (which ID blatantly is not) proves anything ! All science can give is a network of working hypotheses and concepts aimed at prediction and control of human concerns, forever subject to revision as what we call 'knowledge' evolves.

But nothing can 'prove' ID, in the sense that nothing, even in science (which ID blatantly is not) proves anything

Is it science to discuss the evidence of who designed the first automobile, the first wagon, the first wheel and axle?

No, not quite. My 'try' is that there is a God, whose ways and thoughts are higher than yours and mine, created the world. I understand it can be far-fetched but it's a lot more reasonable than evolution. Have a look at this; https://everestalexander.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/atheismisstupid.png?w=627

You better take notes...

Yes but the overall result is bizarre gibberish.

No. The 'denial of science' is entirely yours.
Since ID is not 'falsifiable in principle' it is not 'scientific' by definition. (I thought we'd been through this before...Popper's falsifiability principle).

You seem to be fixed on one song nd dont see any other aspects of the piles of data, such as biogeographic adaption nd speciation, convergence(hint hint), "red Queen", winnowing nd EXTINCTION of the many; adaptive radition nd the "Baldwin Effect"; uses of same genes to accomplish different phenotypic expressions and thus, species diversity,(eg PAX-6),"stop triplet nucleotides" that can turn off/on proteins like SWS opsins (which control vision sensitivity and color ranges for many different species), the "tool box" of Long and short interspersed elements which allow scientists to "Track" common ancestry;gene flow and genetic drift.

The fossil record provides us with many examples ( aka "fossil species") of so many of these variants in a single genus that we can see adaptive pressure imposed by the environment for (eg) trilobites to conform to the changing condition of the water nd sediment load.

You seem to be fixed on one song nd dont see any other aspects of the piles of data, such as biogeographic adaption nd speciation, convergence(hint hint), "red Queen", winnowing nd EXTINCTION of the many

per and multiple books that random mutations are the only driver for new information for natural selection to use, I just agree with one the best. We need to concentrate on how random mutations can provide such complex information by random generation of new information. Wiki says,

Quote:

the Red Queen effect, is an evolutionary hypothesis which proposes that organisms must constantly adapt, evolve, and proliferate not merely to gain reproductive advantage, but also simply to survive while pitted against ever-evolving opposing organisms in an ever-changing environment. The hypothesis intends to explain two different phenomena: the constant extinction rates as observed in the paleontological record caused by co-evolution between competing species,[1] and the advantage of sexual reproduction (as opposed to asexual reproduction) at the level of individuals.[2]

The red queen effect has nothing to do with generating new information for the DNA, it is just a more detailed description of natural selection.

Farmer said

Quote:

"Baldwin Effect"; uses of same genes to accomplish different phenotypic expressions and thus, species diversity

Wiki says

Quote:

Selected offspring would tend to have an increased capacity for learning new skills rather than being confined to genetically coded, relatively fixed abilities. In effect, it places emphasis on the fact that the sustained behavior of a species or group can shape the evolution of that species. The "Baldwin effect" is better understood in evolutionary developmental biology literature as a scenario in which a character or trait change occurring in an organism as a result of its interaction with its environment becomes gradually assimilated into its developmental genetic or epigenetic repertoire (Simpson, 1953; Newman, 2002). In the words of Daniel Dennett,[2]

The Baldwin effect argues that learned behavior can be passed on genetically and guide evolution. Learned behavior is intelligence. Baldwin assumed that this intelligence gradually assimilated into its developmental genetic or epigenetic repertoire. That by definition is intelligence introducing new information into the DNA code, or an argument for ID. (but is not an argument for a God of the bible, but a more organic intelligence in nature) This still only guides random mutations, and is hardly the answer for how in the heck did random mutations provide the complex information so consistently.

Farmer

Quote:

(eg PAX-6),"stop triplet nucleotides" that can turn off/on proteins like SWS opsins (which control vision sensitivity and color ranges for many different species), the "tool box" of Long and short interspersed elements which allow scientists to "Track" common ancestry;gene flow and genetic drift.

Wiki

Quote:

Paired box protein Pax-6, also known as aniridia type II protein (AN2) or oculorhombin, is a protein that in humans is encoded by the PAX6 gene.[5] Pax6 is a transcription factor present during embryonic development.

In molecular biology, a transcription factor (TF) (or sequence-specific DNA-binding factor) is a protein that controls the rate of transcription of genetic information from DNA to messenger RNA, by binding to a specific DNA sequence.[1][2] Their function is to regulate - turn on and off - genes in order to make sure that they are expressed in the right cell at the right time and in the right amount throughout the life of the cell and the organism. Groups of TF's function in a coordinated fashion to direct cell division, cell growth, and cell death throughout life; cell migration and organization (body plan) during embryonic development; and intermittently in response to signals from outside the cell, such as a hormone. There are up to 2600 TFs in the human genome.

TFs work alone or with other proteins in a complex, by promoting (as an activator), or blocking (as a repressor) the recruitment of RNA polymerase (the enzyme that performs the transcription of genetic information from DNA to RNA) to specific genes.[3][4][5]

PAX 6 is an amazing protien, that makes sure the right type of cell is growing in the right place at the right time in an embryo. We kind of understand what it does and kind of understand how it works.

wiki

Quote:

Role in evolution[edit]
Further information: Evolutionary developmental biology
Gene duplications have played a crucial role in the evolution of species. This applies particularly to transcription factors. Once they occur as duplicates, accumulated mutations encoding for one copy can take place without negatively affecting the regulation of downstream targets. However, changes of the DNA binding specificities of the single-copy LEAFY transcription factor, which occurs in most land plants, have recently been elucidated.
(LEAFY (abbreviated LFY) is a plant gene that causes groups of undifferentiated cells called meristems to develop into flowers instead of leaves with associated shoots.)[1] In that respect, a single-copy transcription factor can undergo a change of specificity through a promiscuous intermediate without losing function. Similar mechanisms have been proposed in the context of all alternative phylogenetic hypotheses, and the role of transcription factors in the evolution of all species.[74][75]

Basically this where the rubber meets the road. These transcription factors is probably where the new information is entering the DNA, for evolution. These proteins guide the cell growth of vast number of cell types, that reproduce very complex organisms, and do it new near perfection. They are carrying an extremely complex code that reacts differently in different situations, and maybe even in different environments. I don't know if we can tell if new information is being introduced by the arrangement of these proteins randomly or, was encoded in the DNA at a much earlier and more primitive era in expectation of planned future environmental conditions. In the end Nei is right. These protiens have nothing to do with natural selection, and a random process is necessary to introduce new information that created these protiens at the beginning stages of evolution or is introducing the new information into them as evolution progresses. I believe that is asking random processes to provide more complexity than can be reasonably done. Anyone stating or implying that the genetic code is being guided or reacting to the environment through natural selection which leads to macroevolution, is implying there is a built in intelligence in nature, and is refusing to identify it as ID because of philosophical biases. How the information is transferred across these proteins is the next frontier of biogentics. https://www.academia.edu/7363559/Quantum_biology

Natural selection does not create new information for the DNA to work with. Random mutations do.

You seem to be fixed on one song and dont see any other aspects of the piles of data, such as".... /quote] Then I list several examples (the first of which you got ass backward).
"ADAPTIVE RADIATION and the BALDWIN EFFECT--ya failed to see the semicolon at the end of "Baldwin", So if you understood what it modified you wouldna had to look it up to begin

Quote:

PAX 6 is an amazing protien, that makes sure the right type of cell is growing in the right place at the right time in an embryo.

I suggest you do quite a bit more study about this gene protein alone.With an understanding beyond a Wiki clip you will learn its involvement in differentiation among various higher taxa eyes(like compund eyes of a fruit fly, the compound eye of a horseshoe crab. Also its one of a series of "toolkit proteins" which are responsible for physiology and form The toolkit proteins (others to follow) are devoted to making the form of various tissues and organs and appendages of an organisms phenotype. These proteins actually control (or indirectly affect) where and when that genes are used in the body.
Pax-6, has many other jobs in building the body and body parts. PAX-6 is also involved in nasal structure in ll mammals .
Your concern about mutations alone, needs to be tempered with realizing that a single mutation in,say, the opsin protein effects the spectrum of light thats detected by the rods or cones of the organisms eye. Therefore, ONE MUTATION can lead the way to adaptive radiation between the descendants of a "Common ancestor" of daughter species that will be adapted to day or night life. The opsin mutations provide a dogs breakfst of different phenotypes with those opsin configurations and perhaps a few will survive. This isTransposable genes AND natural selection . Also, post transposition of the PAX-6 opsin, the same protein will direct other mutations via a number of chemical foldings, linkages, transpositions, editing, or omission via inserting a stop codon into the gene
Darwin said (bout the making of complexity , or speciation)
"When we regard every production of nature as one that HAD A HISTORY; when we contemplate every complex structure and instinct as the summing up of many of these contrivances, each usable to the possessor... ho far more interesting will the study of natural-history become".

His use of "contrivance was not a tip of the hat to ID, but a smackass at William Paley who first coined the term when he considered life as the same as wrist watch found in th scrub plains of Scotlnd in 1802.