I've been sitting on the sidelines this month, knowing that I have little to offer in terms of insights or intelligent commentary when it comes to the matters you discuss. I have two points to raise or ask.
The first is this, I think not too long ago I heard Graham make a comment on Crick, or his partner, who famously said that one would have a better chance of reconstituting a fully functional jet in a windstorm than randomly produced human DNA.
So, here my first question. In the same discussion I believe I heard Graham say that the timeline involved must be 800k years, for us to evolved into the humans that we are. It may have been a different number, but whatever it was raised a question I have asked myself repeatedly over the years.
I have no qualms with evolution being good science, that there really is evolution. However, in whatever timeline it was I believe I heard Graham quote Crick as saying that it was simply impossible for evolution to account for our current state of evolution given whatever timeline template he or Crick was referring to.
I was wondering if you could comment on that. Have the hard core evolutionists, to your knowledge, ever been able to demonstrate that the theory ALSO fits the 'timeline,' conclusively?
I asked because I am well aware of academics' propensity to ignore information that contradicts mainstream academia. To often, imo, they will put their careerist agendas ahead of the discipline they 'serve'.
As things stand now, given the trait I mention, I am inclined to think that they can't answer this specifically, and would prefer to align themselves with a set of myths. In the absence of such information I believe, for now, that our evolution has been subject to various discreet interruptions.
But maybe I'm wrong, of course. Could you kindly comment?
Thank you, PB Bytes
That's enough for now. I'll save my next question or comment for later.