Tuesday, January 23, 2018

Embryonic Development Reveals Staggering Complexity

Oh My

I recently cited a paper on the evolution of embryonic development and how the evidence contradicts evolutionary theory and common descent. Even the evolutionists, though in understated terms, admitted there were problems. Evolutionary analyses are “reaching their limits,” it is difficult to “conclude anything about evolutionary origins,” genetic similarities “do not necessarily imply common ancestry,” and “conserved regulatory networks can become unrecognizably divergent.” In other words, like all other disciplines within the life sciences, embryonic development is not working. The science contradicts the theory.

But there is much more to the paper, and as a reader noticed, the authors give a rather blunt admission of the magnitude of the problem, not often seen in the literature:

One of the main reasons for Duboule’s pessimism about the return of the EvoDevo comet is the staggering complexity and diversity of cellular and developmental regulatory processes. The configuration space for realistic models of such systems is vast, high dimensional, and potentially infinitely complex.

Staggering complexity? Staggering diversity? The configuration space is vast and high-dimensional?

And it is potentially infinitely complex?

And we are to believe this is the product of random mutations?

Religion drives science, and it matters.

24 comments:

  1. Darwinism is the religion of cretins, liars and aholes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I forgot to mention gutless cowards. Sorry.

      Delete
    2. Don't forget dirt worshippers too!

      So according to your analysis, does this mean the President is a Darwinist?

      Delete
    3. Cretin, liar ahole, dirt worshiper,coward...I don't know why but Prime Minister Trudeau suddenly comes to mind :D

      Delete
    4. LOL. The gutless dirt worshippers are triggered.

      Delete
    5. I should also mention that the Darwinist community is the synagogue of Satan. LOL

      Delete
    6. ...The Den of Diabolicalness, the Lair of Lucifer, the House of Hades!

      Delete
    7. Spawn of Satan! Children of the Corn! LOL

      Delete
  2. In the 1960s Ernst Mayr said that it is futile looking for homologs except in closely related populations. The deep genetic similarities across all species was not expected. And now that it has been observed we are told that it is evidence for Common Descent.

    ReplyDelete
  3. And we are to believe this is the product of random mutations?

    Of course not. It's the product of a 4 billion year ongoing process of random genetic variations with feedback from filtering selection and retaining heritable traits.

    You know that of course but your audience never gets tired of the "it's all random!" Creationist lie.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In other words, the usual stupid Darwinist explanation that the curse of dimensionality immediately smashes into non-existence.

      Dirt worshippers never disappoint.

      Delete
    2. Retaining heritable traits? Are gills a heritable trait? Seeing that we don't have them does that mean we do not have fish as a common ancestor?

      Natural selection is non-random in a very trivial way-> that being not every individual in a population has the same chance of being eliminated due to their inherited genetic mistakes. And that changes. There isn't anything creative about the process.

      Delete
    3. We do have vestigial traces of gills in our embryonic stage Joke. They're called branchial clefts.

      Nice to see Joke Gallien is just as scientifically ignorant and as stupid as ever.

      Delete
    4. They're called branchial clefts

      Oh my, another icon of evolution. You can call them out, but they just keep coming back. @scientificallyIgnorant

      Delete
    5. LOL! I'll go with actual evolutionary biology over the Creationist lies and propaganda of "Moonie" Wells. But hey, how can you go wrong with Mapou and Joke on your side? :)

      Delete
    6. Well at least you're in good company. Every evolutionist, it seems, has made this howler.

      http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2010/06/jerry-coyne-human-embryo-has-gill-slits.html

      Delete
    7. We do have vestigial traces of gills in our embryonic stage Joke.

      No, we don't.

      They're called branchial clefts.

      Except those are not traces of gills. It's as if you are proud to be ignorant, timmy.

      Delete
    8. CH "Well at least you're in good company. Every evolutionist, it seems, has made this howler.

      http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2010/06/jerry-coyne-human-embryo-has-gill-slits.html"


      Making this claim and then linking to other OPs written by you is not exactly compelling evidence.

      Delete
    9. Yo, Billy the spear shaker,

      What's evidence in your the opinion of a gutless dirt worshipper is a pile of manure to thinking people who do not worship dirt as their great granddaddy.

      ahahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha...

      Delete
    10. They are not gill slits. They- the pharyngeal arches- only have a faint resemblance to the gill slits of fish embryos. On close inspection the differences are clear. And they do not develop into any respiratory apparatus.

      Delete
  4. Dirt worshipper: We do have vestigial traces of gills in our embryonic stage

    So what? Cars have wheels just like donkey carts did more millenia ago. Does that mean cars evolved via some stupid, brain-dead Darwinist mechanism?

    Dirt worshippers are not only gutless. They are stupid as dirt.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Evolutionism is like The Blob!

    It will digest all new findings as confirming its fake theory.

    ReplyDelete