The simplistic view of a cell in Darwin's time allowed for the possibility of natural selection working on random variations as a viable mechanism for evolution. Francis Crick's sequence hypothesis in 1957, where the order of bases in the DNA acts as a language in ultimately constructing proteins, has since made natural selection an insufficient mechanism for evolution. Randomness working on the language of genes almost always corrupts, and convinced Crick that life could not have evolved here on earth.. Crick's discovery didn't make him a theist. He kicked the can down the road, claiming aliens seeded the earth with life.
The gene: where naturalism goes to die
The simplistic view of a cell in Darwin's time allowed for the possibility of natural selection working on random variations as a viable mechanism for evolution. Francis Crick's sequence hypothesis in 1957, where the order of bases in the DNA acts as a language in ultimately constructing proteins, has since made natural selection an insufficient mechanism for evolution. Randomness working on the language of genes almost always corrupts, and convinced Crick that life could not have evolved here on earth.. Crick's discovery didn't make him a theist. He kicked the can down the road, claiming aliens seeded the earth with life.
Evolution: a theory in search of evidence
Key to evaluating the evidence of evolution is the distinction between macro and microevolution. Creationists don't dispute microevolution, the observation that species adapt to their environment. Yet biology textbooks cite examples of microevolution to make macroevolutionary conclusions: microevolution leads to speciation, or totally new species. Transitional fossils, the proof that Darwin insisted would prove or disprove his theory, are "extremely" rare, and persists as "the trade secret of paleontology. Supporters of evolution have significantly modified Darwin's theory, making it virtually untestable and unverifiable, an approach that is unscientific.