Mike Behe’s book party for Darwin Devolves live-streamed from Seattle tonight

"I now believe it, (the edge of evolution), is much deeper than the level of class. I think is actually goes down to the level of family" Michael Behe: Darwin Devolves - video - 2019 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTtLEJABbTw In this bonus footage from Science Uprising, biochemist Michael Behe discusses his views on the limits of Darwinian explanations and the evidence for intelligent design in biology. bornagain77

This is significant enough to upend the Darwinian narrative, but it gets worse.

The narrative has been upended. A lot of people cannot accept that. Silver Asiatic

Mutations: X-Men Flub Evolution (Science Uprising 06) - July 2019 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ivgQFIST1g (Featuring Behe: "Darwin Devolves") Are chance mutations really “the key to our evolution” like they claim in the X-Men films? Or are there strict limits to what mutations can accomplish, limits that point to the need for an overarching designer and the failure of Darwinian evolution to create fundamentally new things? When Darwin’s Foundations Are Crumbling, What Will the (Darwinian) Faithful Do? Excerpt: Here’s a summation of the evolutionary picture that has emerged, according to Behe (in his new book "Darwin Devolves": • The large majority of mutations are degradatory, meaning they’re mutations in which the gene is broken or blunted. Genetic information has been lost, not gained. • Sometimes the degradation helps an organism survive. • When the degradation confers a survival advantage, the mutation spreads throughout the population by natural selection. In genetics, a loss of information generally translates into a loss of function, so it might seem counterintuitive to suppose that a degradatory mutation would confer a survival advantage. Behe gives several examples, though, of instances where damaged genes have been shown to aid survival. In the case of the sickle-cell gene, for example, a single amino acid change causes hemoglobin to behave in a way that inhibits growth of the malaria microbe. It’s a loss-of-function mutation, but it confers a survival advantage in malaria-prone regions. The upshot of all this is that Darwin was right in believing that natural selection operating on random variations can cause organisms to become adapted to their environments, but he was wrong in believing that the process was constructive. Nowhere has the Darwinian mechanism been shown to build a complex system. It has only been shown to modify an already-existing system, usually in a loss-of-function manner. This is significant enough to upend the Darwinian narrative, but it gets worse. The same factors that contribute to adaptation work to prevent a species from evolving much further. Random mutation and natural selection quickly adjust species to their environmental niches, Behe writes, and then they maroon them there. He cites results from the long-running experiment conducted by Michigan State microbiologist Richard Lenski, whose E. coli lineage has surpassed 65,000 generations (equivalent to more than a million years for a large, complex species like humans), as sound evidence that random mutations wreak havoc in a species—and then that havoc gets frozen in place by natural selection. Behe sums up his main argument like this: “beneficial degradative mutations will rapidly, relentlessly, unavoidably, outcompete beneficial constructive mutations at every time and population scale.”1 The only Darwinian examples of evolution that have been observed have followed this pattern and resulted in evolutionary dead ends. Darwin devolves.,,,, https://salvomag.com/article/salvo49/darwinism-dissembled

bornagain77

#8 in Developmental Biology (Books) #56 in Science & Religion #14 in Creationism

Now, #3 in Developmental Biology (Books) #29 in Science & Religion #11 in Creationism Silver Asiatic

I’m sure that it will be as well attended as a Jeffrey Epstein party. :) Brother Brian