Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
backspace wrote: >> I guess you can say it is redundant, though this isn't obvious. >> Thus, its inclusion, though redundant, is necessary. Furthermore, >> indicating it is non-random sets it apart from the underlying >> mutations and genetic drift which are decidedly random. > The problem is your making English undefined. No, the problem is you adding unnecessary rigidity to a language that I understand quite fine. I am not making English undefined. Far from it. I am interpreting the use of a certain word, "selection", as literal or metaphorical. > I don't know what it is > that materialists are trying Your ignorance is hardly anyone's problem other than your own. > to say with "selection" other than merely pointing out that given your > premises the word is not available to you as Dernavich explained on > http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/features/2001/dernavich1.html He makes the same mistake you do: "We are comfortable with 'natural selection' as a phrase, because it conjures up images of Mother Nature, or some cosmic Gepetto tinkering with his toys. As a technical term, it is a misleading oxymoron." It's only misleading to anyone who is predisposed to Intelligent Design or creation. Evolutionists understand that it is merely a metaphor which contrasts the selection by humans for desireable traits in domesticated plants and animals with the how genomes succeed or fail in interspecific and intraspecific competition in nature. >>> Would would you agree that the synonym or non-random is directed? >> Would you agree that the sentence above is poorly worded? > Yes, I would agree let me try again: > Woland, would you agree that the synonym for non-random is directed? No.