Buzzard3
Well-Known Member
- Jan 31, 2022
- 1,526
- 229
- 64
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- AU-Liberals
Talk is cheap. Face it, there's no way to test the theory that the evolution (assuming it's eventrue) is the result of natural selection acting on mutations. All you've got is a story.The mechanism is mutation and selection.
You've yet to explain how. So far all you've done is parrot the Darwinist credo that mutations and selection are responsible for the evolution of the eye.It can be tested.
You seem to want to reduce science to story-telling. A theory that can't be tested is not science - it's just a story.You seem to want to be able to reproduce the entire historical development of the eye in a lab, which of course would be ludicrous.
Have you ever heard of the scientific method?
... which has nothing to do with testing the theory that those genetic paths are the result of a process of natural selection and mutations.We need to be able to show that a genetic paths can exist, and that there are genetic relationships in the various types of eyes that support such paths.
Last edited:
Upvote
0