Ironically, the rarity of genes and proteins in sequence space means that even thirty million years is not nearly enough time for the neo-Darwinian mechanism to generate a new gene or protein, much less a new animal form.
Read More ›
Yesterday, I introduced the subject of exon shuffling and gave a few reasons why such a mechanism cannot explain the origins of the earliest, most ancient proteins.
Read More ›
Since some of Poenie's criticisms touch on my work, I'll offer my perspective in a few posts, each focusing on one of Poenie's posted comments.
Read More ›
If you've wondered how to share Stephen Meyer's challenge to Darwinian evolution with the widest possible audience, and in the most easily digestible way, here it is.
Read More ›
Those negative reviews that actually review parts of the book focus repeatedly on Stephen Meyer's presumed error in claiming that the Cambrian event poses a problem.
Read More ›
A common rebuttal to the argument for intelligent design from irreducible complexity is the hypothesis of incremental indispensability. The phrase was coined, I believe, by William Dembski.
Read More ›
Darwin's champions arbitrarily limit the range of possible interpretations, for reasons that most cannot convincingly justify or even candidly specify.
Read More ›
