Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

The Evidence for Cell-Directed Mutations

Jonathan Bartlett
January 15, 2019
Intelligent Design
Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

I’ve found that a lot of people, including biologists, aren’t aware of the evidence for cell-directed mutations. Therefore, I did a video describing the evidence for this.

Video here:

It’s kind of long, but I try to cover most of the objections. I’ll have a second video covering more about how to use this information to conceptualize mutational processes in the light of directed mutation, and use these ideas in research.

Comments
Brother Brian- You didn't have a point @ 6. You are nothing but an ignorant troll. Everything I said in 7 is true and you cannot refute it.ET
January 18, 2019
January
01
Jan
18
18
2019
06:32 AM
6
06
32
AM
PST
ET@7, is that an example of your stellar intellect? Thank you for demonstrating my point at 6.Brother Brian
January 17, 2019
January
01
Jan
17
17
2019
08:26 PM
8
08
26
PM
PST
"Not By Chance", by Dr. Lee Spetner, was published back in 1997. The book was a response to Dr. Dawkins' "The Blind Watchmaker" and pretty much made Dr. Dawkins look like a man who fancied just-so stories over science. The point is the case for directed mutations has a history of reasoning and support.ET
January 17, 2019
January
01
Jan
17
17
2019
08:25 PM
8
08
25
PM
PST
Wow. OK so Brother Brian is just another ignorant troll.
At TSZ, by my count, you have had feedback from nine or ten different people.
Feedback? By people who couldn't support their position's claims if their sorry lives depended on it? Really?ET
January 17, 2019
January
01
Jan
17
17
2019
05:45 PM
5
05
45
PM
PST
Johnnyb
The argument from blog comment count. The latest standard in logical analysis.
It is not the number of comments that count. It is the number of commenters. At TSZ, by my count, you have had feedback from nine or ten different people. At UD all you have is comments by ET, not exactly a shining light in the ID community. That should tell you something.Brother Brian
January 17, 2019
January
01
Jan
17
17
2019
05:17 PM
5
05
17
PM
PST
Here, he can only muster two, from the same person. OK, three now.
The argument from blog comment count. The latest standard in logical analysis.johnnyb
January 17, 2019
January
01
Jan
17
17
2019
04:50 PM
4
04
50
PM
PST
Brother Brian- Here, we do not doubt the veracity of the claim being made. Over there most do.ET
January 17, 2019
January
01
Jan
17
17
2019
12:04 PM
12
12
04
PM
PST
Johnnyb posted the same video over at TSZ today and already has 24 comments. Here, he can only muster two, from the same person. OK, three now.Brother Brian
January 17, 2019
January
01
Jan
17
17
2019
11:52 AM
11
11
52
AM
PST
Also, what is meant by "random mutation" is that it is a purely chance event- the literature calls them accidents, errors or mistakes- caused by copying errors, editing mistakes or some external cause, like radiation damage. They just happen. They are not caused by the cell actively changing its genome. Issues arise because if ID is correct then organisms were not only intelligently designed but they were so designed with the ability to adapt and evolve.ET
January 17, 2019
January
01
Jan
17
17
2019
11:27 AM
11
11
27
AM
PST
There is also "Evolution: A View from the 21st Century" by Dr James Shapiro- it makes the case for what he calls "natural genetic engineering"- meaning he thinks it is an evolved feature and by evolved he means via NS, drift, etc.ET
January 17, 2019
January
01
Jan
17
17
2019
11:04 AM
11
11
04
AM
PST

Leave a Reply