albert de Roos writes:
Hi genomicus. Yes, that is true, it does not directly invoke an intelligent designer, but also does not preclude it. Based on my reverse engineering, I propose a mechanistic scenario of how the eukaryotic cell was put together. However, when one arrives at the driving forces for this behavior, it gets a lot more difficult. Classical terms such as natural selection and random mutation seem irrelevant or useless at a macroevolutionary scale. For now, I assume that energy input in the form of day/night and seasonal changes can explain evolution, but at the moment we miss some parts of the equation.
Although not strictly revelant to your orgin of life theory, it seems that your evolutionary theory is consistent with that of James A. Shapiro of the University of Chicago. His life's work set forth in his book "Evolution: A view from the 21st Century"describes "natural genetic engineering" a theory that seems to be accepted by your theory of evolution.
Are you familar with Shapiro's work?, and do you agree with his rejection of the random nature of genetic change by natural selection theory?
Edited by shadow71, : No reason given.
Edited by shadow71, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2