Culture Darwinism News

Summation to date re Darwinian evolution is not a valid research program

Spread the love

Discussion here. Kicked off here:

Well, this has been an interesting discussion! Much thanks to BA77 for useful background info. Recommended.

Some respondents also attempted to interject the claim that ID does not have a valid research program (RDFish?)

First, whether any intellectual enterprise has a “valid” research program isn’t a reasonable question unless the public is being asked to buy in (public funding, legislation, curricula, etc.).

Private parties should be free to spend their money on any not-obviously criminal enterprise they wish.

Is it valid to spend (waste?) money on the search for ET? Origin of life? In the absence of useful answers, that must remain an open question.

My own view (O’Leary for News) favors spending a certain amount of money on stuff taxpayers are just plain interested in. It’s their money, after all. But not if it all becomes a big, stupid public fight.

Second, I am not aware of any claim that ID should be tax-funded. The only group that could possibly advocate that would be Discovery Institute, which doesn’t advocate it.

Darwin’s followers, by contrast, think that every third- or fourth-rate Darwin shout should be publicly funded.

Maybe that is the secret of their success, in a world where people still listen to airheads and bimbos in legacy media?

Note to investors: Biotech obviously does not depend on Darwinism but rather on design. Darwinism did not even correctly predict antibiotic resistance. If you think Darwinism matters in biotech, and need the portfolio for your retirement, put your affairs in the hands of a trustee.

Let’s hope the professionals there are smarter than some of the investors.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

One Reply to “Summation to date re Darwinian evolution is not a valid research program

  1. 1
    bornagain77 says:

    OT: The construction of the protein making machines, (ribosomes), is an extremely complex process that requires more than 200 helper proteins to get the job done.

    Question, how did the first ribosome get constructed if there were no ribosomes around to construct the more than 200 helper proteins needed to construct the first ribosome?

    Armed Forces in the Cell Keep DNA Healthy – September 8, 2015
    Excerpt: According to Prof. Hurt, the production of ribosomes is an extremely complex process that follows a strict blueprint with numerous quality-control checkpoints. The protein factories are made of numerous ribosomal proteins (r-proteins) and ribosomal ribonucleic acid (rRNA). More than 200 helper proteins, known as ribosome biogenesis factors, are needed in the eukaryotic cells to correctly assemble the r-proteins and the different rRNAs. Three of the total of four different rRNAs are manufactured from a large precursor RNA. They need to be “trimmed” at specific points during the manufacturing process, and the superfluous pieces are discarded. “Because these processes are irreversible, a special check is needed,” explains Ed Hurt.
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....99121.html

Leave a Reply