Evolution makes no sense

TCI follow your indepth replies; and for what?Most of Conspirator's statements (regardless of source) you seem to dismiss as perhaps oversimplified. But your responses, like that of many Evos and YECs seem also oversimplified rebuts (like the one I just got from Monck about my not saying anything scientific).For example:
Our human physiologies are extremely and fortuitously complex. To state that these could have even possibly evolved from OWM's etc. is bold (albeit metaphysically possible in theory only). What seems impossible in physics is the human evolution of enzymes and their dynamically interactive macro-physiologies:Take an enzyme, any enzyme (or enzyme families), with its active site(s) and catalytic force vectors so intricately and perfectly arranged; with every atom crucially supporting one another for the active site(s) to be beneficial. Now explain how one simple enzyme could have possibly evolved via physics of selective reproduction/DNA-mutation when its active site seems to require all of its atoms in place A PRIORI (sometimes hundreds of thousands, i.e. in the case of DNA-Gyrase).That the DNA-sequences could ever code an enzyme via incremental reproductive mutations seems impossible in micro-physics, due to overwhelming randomization forces overcoming any reproductive selection pressures. Sure, an insignificant garbage molecule might mutate, but then into a glorious enzyme? (And yes, enzymes are glorious to our survival and that of all ecosystems)Any enzymatic mega-molecule (and its so called families), with its catalytic force vectors at its active site(s) seems to require A PRIORI DNA codons via some non-ToE mechanism, regardless of the theoretical possibilities.On the other hand, A YEC's assertion of ID seems equally improbable, at least from an empiricist's point of view, as you seem to infer. While I accept the YEC's position as easier to believe, because it erradicates the God-of-the-gaps faith-bias altogether, I must denounce the mega-ToE position, too: Since evolutionary reproductive mutations of enzymes seems too impossible for these exquiste mega-molecules.If you or anyone has information on how an enzyme like a Kinase or DNA-Gyrase could have possibly evolved, please let me know. The ToE (micro nor mega) makes no sense to me here.I won't mention other (proposed) ICs at this point.Forgive my intrusion.Philip

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quetzal:
gene: OWM is Philip's idiosyncratic abbreviation for "old world monkeys". Which in itself is a nice non-sequitor.

---

--I read OWN in an Evo-tree article referenced by Mark, I think.
--Welcome, back Quetzal.
--With respect to your intermittant schedule and mine: might you not, at least theoretically or by speculation, have something plausible to say about a ToE explaining enzyme/enzyme family(s) formation, that makes any empirical or rational sense, whatsoever? (Take your time, expect slow responses from me, too)

--TC, thanks for your thoughtful reply.
--I see Quetzel has resurrected somewhat. And just in time. Thus, almost reflexively, I (ap-)perceive to have cast this enzyme inquiry into his awakening consciousness, where it will (no doubt), stew, ponder, boil up, and spew out into something really tantalizing.