Evolution is a basic, biological process

WhileI personally believe that life as we see it was not designed by a designer but shaped by the universe itself, your example only holds up if you assume that the designer held a human centric viewpoint.The example, is flawed at 1.5. If the designer were, for example, virus centric then it is a great design. The designer was smart enough to provide all the hosts from the various infection sources.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

If one is willing to look at the idea of a designer seriously, the system as a whole MUST be considered. From that perspective, much of the inconistencies of the ID movement are removed, they no longer are an obstacle.One big problem with ID is that the designs are pretty piss poor, eyes built backwards, left over parts in the critter, designs like the throat where a single passage goes to two different sub-functions with no adequate means of directing traffic so that the critter chokes on the very fuel needed to survive.If the purpose was to design man, then the designer was at best, incompetent.But if the purpose was directed towards the virus, the amoeba, the ring-worm and all the other nasties of the world, then all makes sense. Then, it doesn't matter if the host is poorly designed, the host is simply slop for the hogs.There is a case for ID and if carried to any reasonable conclusion, I doubt it would get the support it now enjoys.This message has been edited by jar, 12-31-2004 10:01 AM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

How do your father and mother, your tall aunt the Ostrich, your tall uncle the Giraffe, your broad aunt the Hippopotomus and your hairy uncle the Baboon feel about your insatiable curiosity? And what does a Crocodile eat for dinner?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

There are two big errors in your understanding.You summarized the even as : Your last step is the biggest error. That is not what happens at all. Rather the mutations happen continuously whether or not the anti-biotic is present. But since they serve no function they have no effect on the critter.But when you introduce the anti-biotic, if it does not kill off all the critters, the ones that survive to reproduce will be those that already have the resistance. That means that the population will change from a mix of non-resistant and resistant critters to one where all the critters are resistant.The bigger error though is one that underlies much of what you've posted. You seem to think that evolution has a direction, that it is intended, directed, driven or controled, that it is intentional. It's not. It is not from worse to better or less complex to more complex. It is only a history of what happened.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

But we can see examples all around us. And the bacteria developing resistance is a great example. But it is not something that happens on demand.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion