Strictly, you are wrong. Any “missing links” are still missing. What we do have are tons of found links. Once a link is found it is no longer missing, obviously.
Well yes I should have said “previously missing links”. I will correct it.Strictly, you are wrong. Any “missing links” are still missing. What we do have are tons of found links. Once a link is found it is no longer missing, obviously.
Simple things do not need design. Dr. Dembski allows simple things, and non-specified complex things, to arise from chance or necessity, as per Monod.
So NS is not specified. and we know it is not creative but conserves the organism. (science)
Random mutations are the creative part, being random they try all sorts of new things. As you say, NS is generally conservative. In an unchanging environment it is very conservative, hence the “equilibrium” part of Punctuated equilibrium. In a changing environment it is a bit less conservative and selects those random mutations which are useful in the current version of the environment. Change is driven by random mutation; stasis is driven by natural selection. It is the tension between the two processes which gives evolution a lot of its power.
Your problem here is that ID is a legal idea, designed to get a form of creationism taught in US Public schools. You can’t mention that God is the Designer. See “cdesign proponentsists” for an example of the removal of God from ID textbooks.
Oh, they do, do they? They TRY all sorts of new things as they go through an algorithm of sorts?
Catholics knew ID long before. In fact, the reason modern science is what it is because we recognized the universe to be rational and worthy of study.
They are pretty straight forward. Having had a number of friends, family and aquaintances succumb to the reality of natural selection, whereby anything that does not quite fit, dies and the random mutations that cause cancer, I do agree also that no intelligence is involved in those processes. Creation, is a totally different matter.
That whizzing sound you can hear is a metaphor passing you by. Do you really think that Matthew 4:8 requires you to believe in a flat earth?
Oh, they do, do they? They TRY all sorts of new things as they go through an algorithm of sorts?
Random mutation causes variations in the enzymes/proteins of an organism. Most of the variant enzymes are not beneficial. Some enzymes are beneficial. Natural selection differentially amplifies the genes that cause those beneficial enzymes through differential reproductive success. That causes those variants of those enzymes to spread through the population over time.
At this point it is not enough that you assert this.
You want beneficial mutations? HbC, Apo AI-Milano, lactase persistence, various high altitude adaptations in Tibet, the Andes and Africa. And those are all in humans. There are others, like Warfarin resistance in mice and rats, or Myxomotosis resistance in rabbits.
You keep saying this over and over even though it has been pointed out to you numerous times that the loss of one function is accompanied by the gain of another function - namely the ability to breed with others of the new species.
When you say “we” I hope you are not restricting this recognition to only Catholics. It is true that the Church has long sought out scientific knowledge, but so have other groups who realized totally independently of the Church that the universe is rational and worthy of study.
No, because Evolution is empirical, observable, repeatable, and predictable - just not the way you want it to be.
I think you should explain how your proposed mechanism would work.
What do you mean? It sort of runs counter to the definition of random.