Fine tuning/ programming

Dr. Sing writes:Well, you've given an example of how selection (environmental pressures) acts on variation (mutations) to produce the best effect (fittest organism). I see the beauty of the logic of that argument, I do. But I am going to focus of the very basic process of action potential to prove my point. Natural selection has nothing whatsoever to do with this process. Natural selection can act on something that already exists. My point is focusing on how do bring something to existence without intelligence?"

Dr. Sing writes:I've demonstrated that:1. having the same 4 parts function differently in two different types of muscle contributing to their functionalities requires foreknowledge and intelligence (therefore, a programmer who possess these).

Dr. Sing writes:Okay, so please explain to me how it might have occurred naturally.

Dr. Sing writes:FYI, tetanus is not caused by bacteria or virus.

Wikipedia writes:The primary symptoms are caused by tetanospasmin, a neurotoxin produced by the Gram-positive, obligate anaerobic bacterium Clostridium tetani.

Dr. Sing writes:Anyway, foremost IDsts may think one thing and you might expect me to just follow their footsteps but the fact that Darwin himself said this: "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." is indicative of how unsure of his own theory he was.

Darwin writes:To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei, as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself originated; but I may remark that, as some of the lowest organisms in which nerves cannot be detected, are capable of perceiving light, it does not seem impossible that certain sensitive elements in their sarcode should become aggregated and developed into nerves, endowed with this special sensibility.

Dr. Sing writes:Exactly, and his "excellent response" is based on his own assumptions.

And its the same old "mutation and selection" answer.