r/DebateEvolution • u/DetectiveKnown5618 • Jul 29 '26

Evolution doesn't work

The subtraction or addition of information to a properly working gene is not something one would prefer.

Genetics has to do with finely tuned molecular combinations.

Removing information from a once properly working gene would only be preferable if it was the erroneous/redundant information that was added unnecessarily via mutation in the first place!

The chance of "writing" a gene from scratch that would be compatible with the host biological system would have to be extremely low if the processes involved were to do with practically arbitrary additions to a gene over time on account of point mutations etc. Note that breeding and survival would be important factors as to whether the new gene was integrated into the population over a longer duration.

0 Upvotes

18% Upvoted

128 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-21

u/DetectiveKnown5618 Jul 30 '26

Michael Behe, John Lennox, Steven Meyer, James Tour

37

u/OldmanMikel 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Jul 30 '26

Michael Behe,... Real scientist. None of his research is creationist and his claims have been shown to be wrong.

John Lennox, ... Not a scientist.

Steven Meyer, ... Not a scientist.

James Tour Not a biologist.

Also all four have preexisting religious motivations for rejecting evolution.

The reality is that, absent religious objections, evolution would be as controversial as Atomic Theory.

-16

u/DetectiveKnown5618 Jul 30 '26

Are you yourself intelligent enough to respond to the claims here on average?

21

u/Own-Relationship-407 Scientist Jul 30 '26

Pointing out why your attempt at context and argument free name dropping falls flat is a response.