- This topic is empty.
- Posts
I'd say no gods exist.
t8 you still have not answered my question that asked you, given your idea that the same code would be used by the designer in different species, whether you predict that the same job would be done the same way in different species.
Do you?
We can use the example of the eye to illustrate, if you like. Would you expect the eye to be similar in different species that have eyes because there is code in common?
Stuart
OK, I will read your post and give you 5 mins of my time. I hope you realise that you are taking away my TV time.
See you over there.
Think of it like a bunch of smart phones. Different models have different cameras. That is up to the designer. Yes there is technology in common. But still different cameras with different megapixel ratings etc.
Most common code is down the bottom of the stack. As you go up, you see differences with different kinds of life forms. In the first 50% or so, there is not much difference between many living things plants and animals. Even they share code. But differences between species say between a dog and a cat are not that much and are defined at the top of the stack.
Similarly, lets say we are both running Windows on our PCs. We both have the OS in common, and we might both be running IE, which is embedded into the shell (further up the stack). At the top we have the programs. Perhaps the only difference between our PCs is the programs. And maybe we do not have any programs in common. That makes our PCs different.
But from the above example, say 80% of our code may be the same and 20% being the difference.
Case in hand, this is why when a virus hits Windows, it takes out so many PCs. Because there is little variation of code in the OS. God being a better programmer at least built robustness into species so that if the environment changed, or a virus attacks a species, then usually not all will die, but some will survive to pass on their genes and thus preserve the species. It is this very thing that Darwin turned into Evolution. A reverse conclusion to try and disprove God perhaps?
It seems your analogy has nothing to say about the variations that are actually found in the genes that produce the same protein in different animals.
Can you show how it is relevant to the observations made in molecular evidence and in morphology in the eye or other genes and their phenotypes?
Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
