Observations about Evolution

I have some observations I've made about evolution. A small few of these observations are posted here: [Edit: Sorry, link is now obsolete]I'd like to invite your feedback. (intelligent feedback, please. No ad hominem statements.)Also, has anyone here responded to the "Starlight and Time" book by D. Russell Humphreys, whose theory points out that time is relative, and may actually reconcile billions of years phenomena with young-earth phenomena.onthuhlistEdited by onthuhlist, : Signature obsolete, so changed itEdited by onthuhlist, : Link obsolete.

WJ, In regards to mechanical engineering, I would argue based on my experience that intelligent intervention is required to produce functional systems. If evolution were a good methodology for the functional micromachines that run the cell, I would expect that the methodology would also hold true for much less sophisticated systems that carry out much fewer interrelated functions - an example is the Windows OS. I would expect that Microsoft could much more quickly develop Windows XP without having to pay top-notch intelligent programmers. Instead, by starting with DOS 2.1 and having a supercomputer iteratively copy the OS, say, 10 billion times (not hard for a computer to do in a reasonable amount of time). The supercomputer would monitor the cumulative errors that cropped up during the copying, and to mimic natural selection, which can only make a selection if the inferior design is not survivable, the supercomputer would weed out copies that caused the blue screen of death. If after 10 billion copies your OS has evolved into Windows XP, I'll be an evolutionist, too.

---

Evolution (the creation of genetic information that codes for new functional constructs) is not proven fact, so it should not be promoted dogmatically.

True, we are discussing ideas from different paradigms, and to shift someone else's paradigm is an enormous challenge. However, I have a thick skin. So "bring it on".I promise to honestly and openly consider all statements. I simply ask that we all stick to the issues, and not base our arguments on insulting the other's profession or other ad hominem arguments which are based on attack of the other's character instead of sticking to the issues.And to clarify, I don't think that evolution by itself is an unintelligent viewpoint. I simply believe that it's a paradigm that, like any paradigmal framework, blinds the observer to data that doesn't fit the paradigm. And I am making observations that don't jive with an evolutionary framework. I'm sure that my paradigm has the same effect on me, blinding me to certain data that doesn't fit my framework. But unless we are all willing to patiently expound what we feel the other is not understanding, the other will never understand or have the chance to learn. We cannot just get impatient and tell the other, "go learn about microbiology" or something like that, since these subjects are so broad that person could read on the subject 24/7 and still not know everything about it. Plus, as we articulate our thoughts, we become more adept at doing so, right?I apologize for my ignorance on how to post to these boards. Sorry for posting a link instead of posting the material here. If posting individual topics in various discussions is the most expeditious way to go, then I'd be glad to do so.To assist me in starting a topic that would not be too broad, does anyone have a suggestion for where they'd like to start, based on one of the thoughts I shared on my linked page? Then I can start such a topic and we can all move there to discuss, as time allows.Thanks.onthuhlistEdited by onthuhlist, : Signature obsolete, so edited it.