Culture Darwinism Intelligent Design News

Proposing plausible non-Darwinian mechanisms for evolution …

Spread the love

In Worldview Blinders, Barry Arrington quotes this comment in a news post about a proposal for a Nobel Prize for fundamental biology (= Darwinism? =evolutionary psychology?):

What’s really needed is a prize recognizing plausible non-Darwinian mechanisms of evolution.

To which Jurassicmac replied:

Uh, before we start handing out prizes for plausible non-Darwinian mechanisms, someone should, y’know, propose one.

Barry comments:

Jurassic is so entangled in his worldview to him alternatives to Darwinism that have been suggested at this site are not a logical possibility. They are almost literally ”unthinkable.”

Yeah. Stories here have included “That new “non-Darwinian mechanism” guy is attracting attention., James Shapiro’s new book, the Altenberg 16, lots of stuff on horizontal gene transfer (here), Eugene Koonin … Etc.

The average Darwinist doesn’t see any of that stuff and probably doesn’t sense a need to know what is going on. Darwin answered the very few questions he ever had and his life is devoted to iterating pressure group talking points.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

7 Replies to “Proposing plausible non-Darwinian mechanisms for evolution …

  1. 1
    Robert Byers says:

    This YEC agrees there are other mechanisms for body change (hard to say the loaded word evolution).
    I insist marine mammals are just marine creatures who took to a empty post flood sea.
    marsupials are just adjusted placentals.

    There are hidden or were mechanisms for rapid change in biology.
    Just not selection on mutation plus time.

    Therefore is evolutionary biology is wrong and yet there was important change then its predictable that the Newton or Einstein of biology has yet to come but will come.
    When this happens it will be a great thing even if not a friend to YEC.
    ID folks surely will prevail in destroying old man Darwin and his hunch.

  2. 2
    Prof. FX Gumby says:

    Well, yes. There are lots of potential non-Darwinian mechanisms for evolution. You also forgot to mention genetic drift. But they still don’t provide any support to ID.

  3. 3
    bornagain77 says:

    ‘But they still don’t provide any support to ID.’

    Because??? Only someone with a a priori philosophical commitment to materialism would make such a statement!

  4. 4
    Eugene S says:

    No existing evolutionary mechanism, Darwinian or not, is capable of explaining the well known difficulties away. The said complexity difficulties render it extremely likely that there is no easy route to the top of Mt Improbable.

    On the other hand, anything that can be explained by evolution is also explainable by intelligent agency (or at least a combination of the two). Something radically different from the existing evolutionary paraphernalia is needed to overcome evolutionary impasses. One such means is (at least sporadic) intelligent parameter tuning or heuristic guidance. Even simplest possible mathematical models of evolution require oracles.

  5. 5
    Joseph says:

    Well Dr Spetner positied “built-in responses to environmental cues” as part of his “non-random evolutionary hypothesis”

  6. 6
    Joseph says:

    Prof FX Gumby:

    Well, yes. There are lots of potential non-Darwinian mechanisms for evolution. You also forgot to mention genetic drift. But they still don’t provide any support to ID.

    And they STILL do NOT provide any support for your position.

    Do you have ANYTHING that supports your position?

  7. 7
    Prof. FX Gumby says:

    All your responses, while interesting in themselves, still do not explain how non-Darwinian evolutionary mechanisms support ID. I see that a new thread has been set up on this subject, so I’ll wander over there.

Leave a Reply