>>>of course natural selection is bounded by the rules of physics. natural selection could be said to be a natural law no?
I suppose so, but I think you are missing my/the point; to think that DNA, genetic code, living cells, complex organs and the differences between classes of animals are CREATED by random mutations and natural selection is real absurdity if you really give it great consideration, and there is no evidence for any of that. We know ns and rv can help modify an organism to a degree, but really, that process DOES NOT begin to explain the wider picture of origins of life etc and we should all know that by now instead of being 'brainwashed' otherwise.
Before Darwin, many biologists considered organic forms to be immutable natural forms or types which like inorganic forms such as atoms or crystals are part of a changeless world order and determined by physical law. So, for example, DNA is not a random accident, but a natural structure like an atom or crystal. As cellular biology progresses, we see that more and more Neo-Darwinism looks highly unsatisfactory as an explanation for the origin of species and how the pattern of life emerged. Could it be that the cosmos is uniquely fit for life as it exists on earth and for organisms of design and biology very similar to our own species?? This Darwinian model of evolution is 'FULL of holes' and totally unsatisfactory. Indeed, even the great philosopher Antony Flew, the figurehead for atheists has recently abandoned his atheism by affirming that there is today no satisfactory naturalistic explanation for the first emergence of living from non-living matter, or for the capacity of life to reproduce itself genetically, and observing that there isn’t even any sign of such an explanation on the horizon ‘if indeed there ever could be.’.
Anyway, I'm not really here to discuss that Neo-Darwinian dogma/doctrine atheistic faith that we all seemed to be forced to 'swallow' for some reason, but to discuss the possible 'existence' of something more powerful than man (I know we seem to struggle with that concept that we may not know everything) at the 'centre' of the universe!???? Einstein, Hawkins think/thought so, so did most of the great philosophers and great scientists....it's where the evidence points in all honesty.
There are too many riddles not yet answered by either biology or the Bible, and by asking them honestly, without foregone conclusions, science could take a huge leap forward. If you think the answers are in safe hands among the ranks of evolutionary biologists, think again. No credible scientific theory has answered these dilemmas, and progress is being discouraged, I imagine, thanks to fundamentalist Christians, Muslims and Jews. By hijacking the whole notion of intelligent design, they have tarred genuine scientific issues with the stain of religious prejudice.
It NEVER ceases to amaze me that people tend to view God as that defined by organized religions; either that 'personal father figure' (that messed up his own creation and then punishes us all for it) exists or there is no 'God'!!!? It's an incredibly futile approach to philosophy. I mean, I personally would not take the scriptures literally at all for starters, not even the Jesus story....a lot of (if not all) that has to be myth. I think reading most of the Bible as an allegory is how it should be read, and in that sense it can be likened very much to mystic, pagan, Gnostic religions - cynical and stoical philosophy too. The New Testament is essentially stoicism in Jewish garb. It's just philosophy and deeply profound in that sense, we really do need to let 'the old man' drown and be reborn and reach 'the promised land' for salvation!! Many many allegories have been used for this concept; Jesus story and the Jews exodus are but two!
But WHAT/WHO is God my friends???????? Is it all of us? Are we all one? Is it nature?? Is it just 'good', what is it?? It's certainly NOT Dawkins!! Watch his face contort and go 'sour' with age, not at ease with himself at all and his anti-religious agenda disguised as 'science'.
"Follow the evidence, wherever it leads.” - The principle of Plato’s Socrates.
__________________
The more you know, the more you realize you don't know, the less you know the more you THINK you know. |