Evolution by Definition

You've yet to start defining it! You're opening brainstorm is so loose that it would include changes in blood sugar levels, antibody response to infection, getting goosebumps when you're cold and getting pregnant! Do you really mean that you consider these examples to be evolution? It's as bad as Behe's definition of science which takes in Astrology.Given that this is obviously so much marsh gas, the causes of your "biological changes" are irrelevant, since you're using tem to list the causes of something that isn't evolution.If you read around a bit on the intrnet, you may gather enough information to refine your definition, however, bear in mind that doesn't really cut the mustard.I think what Phat had in mind is what science defines as evolution.Leave out the stars - that sort of evolution has an entirely different meaning and, as such, has an entirely different definition. You're trying to define the word not the concept.

Eh?You say You do realise that this is the equivalent of asking You have to accept that DNA is a chemical, an unusual one with some amazing properties, but a chemical nonetheless. As such it can't make decisions, it can't reach "conclusions".You have to stop thinking of deoxyribonucleic acid as an entity with control over it's own destiny. It's just an unusual chemical.

When you say are you trying to suggest that the wood "decides" to burn and could just as well have decided not to burn? If this is your attempt to turn my argument back on me, I'm sorry to say that it doesn't work and is the most meaningless drivel spouted so far (but I will happily stand correced if anyone can point a more meaningless example ou to me).Can you clarify what it is you're actually trying to say?