Argumentum ad populum.
NB:
telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/the-pope/11192802/Pope-Francis-says-Big-Bang-theory-and-evolution-compatible-with-divine-Creator.html
catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/01/13/pope-prayers-of-the-faithful-not-the-clergy-can-make-miracles-happen/
For theists evolution means development which is not entirely random and has occurred by Design not Chance! Nor did the laws of nature emerge accidentally. As so often, the truth lies between two extremes: there is a random element in the unfolding of events but the entire process is controlled by God who is not incapable of intervening when necessary. Miracles are an essential part of the divine plan as far as orthodox Christians are concerned…The implication being you’re arguing against them. As I said, the Discovery Institute is funded largely by evangelicals, and it has successfully created a schism among Catholics.
To properly evaluate whether it is a good design or not one has to know the purpose of the design. Bad design does not invalidate design.
We have found purpose for the supposed vestigial organs.
Design is not magic.
Of course not, but it does invalidate a perfect omnimax designer. It is possible that Kolubeto from planet Zargon IV had an off day when designing primates, but omnimax Gods do not have off days.
The point of the GULO-P pseudogene is that it occurs in many primate species, so all those different species share the same error. Either the designer deliberately copied the error into multiple species, or all those species inherited the error from a single common ancestor. Such shared errors are evidence for common descent, in just the same way a Bible manuscript can be traced back to an original version by shared differences. Is this an Alexandrian copy or an Antiochene copy?
The Discovery Institute is not a source of truth, it is a source of political propaganda. Anything from that source needs to be treated very sceptically.
That is not the definition of a vestigial organ. They no longer have their original function (as seen in earlier ancestors) but have been adapted to serve a different function.
Irreducible complexity is most definitely magic: it claims that something can only be the result of parts coming together through mysterious or supernatural forces, not progressively by natural means. By definition, that’s magic.
You are misinformed here. Natural selection is not conservative, it acts to reduce the proportion of deleterious alleles in a population and to increase the proportion of beneficial alleles in a population. It acts to change the proportions of alleles, not to conserve them.
As I said, your source is misinforming you. Predictions of the imminent demise of Darwinism have been around for a very long time. See The Imminent Demise of Evolution.
I disagree. A mousetrap is Irreducibly Complex by Behe’s definition and one can be assembled without magic.
God lifted some design protections as a result of the fall. Adam and Eve had preternatural gifts that were revoked.
Or this variant is present in the 500 or so conserved genes that life has.
all sources should be viewed skeptically, even yours. Have you been keeping up with the failures of the peer review process?
Not totally correct. However, the key point you made is they adapted. Yes, we are marvelously designed to adapt.
No, it can be designed with purpose.
Have you been following the Royal Society?
You are ignoring the specified complexity portion of the argument.
Your interpretation of the Bible is your interpretation of the Bible. Unless you have DNA sequences form Adam, Eve or a close relative then you have no evidence. Remember also that if Adam’s DNA was too far away from modern human DNA then Adam would not be human. He must have been closer to modern human DNA than, say, a chimpanzee in order to be classified as Homo sapiens. Too much difference and he would be a different species.