A far more vital question hovers. Are other life forms also going to advance as has humans? Why has only one life form attained a higher brain and speech - the most powerful tools a life form can possess? This says a life form [species] follows its own kind, and is not fundamentally impacted by evolution but the directive program transmitted by the host parents.
Orthogenesis? In this day and age?
In that case, perhaps you could clear up something that I wanted to ask one of you guys --- how in the world can you reconcile orthogenesis with adaptive radiation?
If evolution impacts all life - this impact is not the factor applying with humans. The math says so.
Curiously enough, you have omitted to include any math in your post.
As a first simple thought, those in our society are wealthy are probably being selected for ultimate success. The traits that make someone wealthy and produce children will most likely be selected for ...
But being wealthy is not a genetic trait. Wealth is inherited, to be sure, but not in one's DNA.
If you refer to what is described as a life form harbouring an inner force which makes it advance, which challenges natural selection [external environmental impacts]. Both appear fantastical and fail when the seed factor is considered. Regardless of any other proposed factor, the transmitted data from the host parents rules: try and evidence any case without it!
Please answer my question.
Did you not notice the ratio factors given: all trillions of life forms VS 1? And the time factor as well? Here's another math busting factor for you:
An on-going prowess is not affected by time. We should see all life forms older than humans to be more advanced - but this is not the case. It is proof the host seed rules! These are the reasons I see great wisdom in Genesis - from a science, not theological, POV.
There's no reality behind adaptive radiation; this is just a neo doctored premise given to the variety of life forms., and disregards the directive program transmission. Why do you not see this happening everywhere now!? AR is calling all the different cars as externally created, while ignoring the car manual, car factory and the car maker.
I gave you many mathematical premises you choose to disregard.
You had a brief flash of being wrong yet coherent; now you are being wrong and incoherent.
I should have known better than to try to talk to you, but for a brief moment it seemed as though you were actually saying something.
Is it really fair to ask for math? I have written a number of technical papers and I am published in technical journals so I sadly know the work involved in modeling. While all of us would welcome quantification in a forum like this, it is unrealistic to expect mathematical models in these posts. This sort of writing is about shooting from the hip.
Well when someone writes: "The math says ..." then I think it's not unreasonable to ask to see the math. If IaJ had instead said that he was "shooting from the hip", then I would not have asked to see the math.