- Jun 28, 2011
- 3,865
- 1,769
- Country
- New Zealand
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
The analogue of your observation of water freezing for Evolutionary science would be the observation of a new thing being invented in nature in the same way as a Zoologist observes the birth of a new creature according to the natural laws of the world.So? The mind of the observer is involved when we watch water freeze in the driveway. That doesn't make ice a product of intelligent design. If random RNA sequences produce the function we're interested in, then the argument that intelligence had to be involved in producing functional RNAs fails.
If, however, a zoologist intervenes in the process to bring about a desired result (say a Panda born in captivity), this says nothing about the viability of the method in the natural world, and only demonstrates that these thing are indeed possible with the intervention of a mind.
The sequences of RNA you refer to would necessarily not be naturally selected for, at the point they met the desired result, in the name of the experiment, and so are not truly natural.
We already know that certain RNA sequences function in the way we are searching for and so we select at the point that the observed sequence serves the function we are looking for.
This, as Mendel pointed out a few years ago, is nothing more than animal breeding, and not anything at all remarkable or anything that resemble the way that in which a blind purposeless natural function might operate.
Upvote
0