Eliezer-
Please update your thinking re: evolution to include the observed evolution of the tuberculosis bacteria strain w.
This sort of evolution (in which organisms presented with a stressor trade and create new DNA sequences quickly- not at random at all) is going to be found to be ubiquitous. Perhaps this explains the difficulty in finding the “transitional forms” in the fossil record—there aren’t the expected transitional forms in the evolution of tuberculosis, and that is based on observation of something real- not a theory. (Another name for this phenomena is called competent cells) The purposefulness may not be so illusionary afterall.
The “blind watchmaker” does not fit the evidence, and the sooner we admit that the sooner we will be able to overcome this bias.
This is not just a theoretical problem—the use of the old theory didn’t give us a cure for tuberculosis, but it was a receipe for creating an incureable disease. How many times do we want to see that scenario play out?
Eliezer- Please update your thinking re: evolution to include the observed evolution of the tuberculosis bacteria strain w. This sort of evolution (in which organisms presented with a stressor trade and create new DNA sequences quickly- not at random at all) is going to be found to be ubiquitous. Perhaps this explains the difficulty in finding the “transitional forms” in the fossil record—there aren’t the expected transitional forms in the evolution of tuberculosis, and that is based on observation of something real- not a theory. (Another name for this phenomena is called competent cells) The purposefulness may not be so illusionary afterall. The “blind watchmaker” does not fit the evidence, and the sooner we admit that the sooner we will be able to overcome this bias. This is not just a theoretical problem—the use of the old theory didn’t give us a cure for tuberculosis, but it was a receipe for creating an incureable disease. How many times do we want to see that scenario play out?