Posted: Jan 21, 2011 3:16 am
by Царь Славян
ID is just creationism in pseudo-scientific clothing.
ID has no creation story, therefore it's not creationism.

And you can't cherry pick.
Depends no what's to be picked.

In biological evolution, there are four main processes: natural selection, genetic drift, sexual selection and migration. Evolution is about the change in gene frequencies over time.
That's pretty much fine with me.

A apparently small genetic change can lead to large differences in morphology, biochemistry, physiology, behavior etc. Sometimes, a significant amount of genetic change can lead to relatively little change in phenotype. It all depends on the nature of the genetic change. For example, there are many isopmorphs of a protein that can do the same job, so different organisms can have a diverse DNA sequences and a different amino acid sequence, and yet in many cases, the protein or enzyme may work the same or in a similar manner.
Changes in signaling regulatory genes [or even some Genetic Regulatory Networks or pathways] can lead to profound changes in morphology at any level. Within species, for example, you can have size polymorphism, sexual dimorphism and specialization of castes, such as in the social hymenoptera.

In development, the embryo's four dimensional geometry changes according to the expression of homeobox genes and other transcription factors. These Genetic Regulatory Networks are both highly conserved in the early-expressed traits, and evolvable in the later expressed traits. (Davidson, 2006).
Okay, I agree. Is this supposed to be an argument against ID or something?

It is quite clear that your knowledge of biology is totally inadequate for you to make even a basic assessment of how biology works.
Really, how did you come to this conclusion?

As a consequence people like you are vulnerable to any crackpot pseudo-explanation that comes along.
I would disagree. I'd rather say that people who believe that they came from rocks are the ones who don't know much about biology.

Unless you can put aside your pre-conceived ideas and loo at the evidence objectively [with no thought as to whether or not you like the conclusions or implications], then you have no hope of ever gaining even a basic understanding of science or nature.
How do you know I haven't already done that? And maybe it is you, wishing to see evidence of having been brought about from a rock, that has this preconcieved ideas? Maybe people didn't come from rocks. Did that ever cross your mind? Maybe you should drop your beliefs about people coming from rocks and look at biology objectively?