Randman writes:
quote:
a progenote isn't radical.
Well, you can define words however you want, but the process envisioned is radically different.
So what? What in the world is so shocking about this? What is so threatening for the whole common descent concept? It is completely expected since no evolution adherent envisions a perfect hereditary mechanism with completely functional DNA and a natural selection 'routine' to just pop out of nothing. There exists necessarily a grey area from simple self-replicating chemicals to the more complex routine that we observe in function now.
Again, claiming that it invalidates common descent (not necessarily universal common descent) is not much different from claiming that the expanding universe cosmology is a myth, just because it is acknowledged that our current physics don't hold during the first tentothepowerminusquadrillion seconds.
In both cases science is aware of the 'problem', and in both cases it does not affect the validity of the general principles that are observed to be in place from a certain moment onwards.
Sure 'special creation' can also fit the data. It would also fit any other possible data, and thus it is useless.