I was just curious as to how a light sensitive cell located inside a skull and embedded in brain tissue would ever migrate towards light. Is there enough light to penetrate the skull and surrounding tissues to make this happen over time? Assuming the migration took many generations and successive mutations occured in approximately the same region o the head, is there really any advantage gained by having a light sensitive cell half way between the original location and the midpoint?
I totally agree. I should have been clear. My intent was to dispute "macro evolution" as fact. Adaptation occurs without question. Common ancestry has no basis in fact.
I think if you'll do some research with an open mind you'll find the basis for evolutionary theory is questionable. It is riddled with mistakes, conjecture, and circular reasoning.
I used to think evolution was a fact. I found out that it is not.
When are people going to quit assuming evolution is a proven fact? Hello? theory? A stupid monkey walking upright becuase of a stomach problem or whatever does not make it a missing link.
We should all figure out how to use the DMCA to our advantage. The author of the paper should have spelled "Shift" backwards, copyrighted the work and then claim the software makers decrypted his article.
Why not use the larger pieces of space junk as target practice for the missle defense shield that Bush is after? Test the system while destroying the junk.
Slashdot Mirror
I was just curious as to how a light sensitive cell located inside a skull and embedded in brain tissue would ever migrate towards light. Is there enough light to penetrate the skull and surrounding tissues to make this happen over time? Assuming the migration took many generations and successive mutations occured in approximately the same region o the head, is there really any advantage gained by having a light sensitive cell half way between the original location and the midpoint?
If you seriously gravity and evolution have the same amount of proof you have a long way to go in your understanding of either concept.
I totally agree. I should have been clear. My intent was to dispute "macro evolution" as fact. Adaptation occurs without question. Common ancestry has no basis in fact.
I can't, nor could someone that espouses evolution as fact.
Its not science.
Evolution, unlike gravity, has no proof. You have just made the first mistake - you approach it assuming that it is fact. Do some homework.
I think if you'll do some research with an open mind you'll find the basis for evolutionary theory is questionable. It is riddled with mistakes, conjecture, and circular reasoning. I used to think evolution was a fact. I found out that it is not.
When are people going to quit assuming evolution is a proven fact? Hello? theory? A stupid monkey walking upright becuase of a stomach problem or whatever does not make it a missing link.
We should all figure out how to use the DMCA to our advantage. The author of the paper should have spelled "Shift" backwards, copyrighted the work and then claim the software makers decrypted his article.
What a stupid statement. Obviously posted by a child. Grow up and post something intelligent.
Why not use the larger pieces of space junk as target practice for the missle defense shield that Bush is after? Test the system while destroying the junk.