DNA sequence comparisons, a similar designer or heredity?

If the passage across a DNA strand is based on the logical difference of opposites rather than some relation to simple semantic information transfer across generations, and by autonomy one relates both origin and diversity in the same synthesis, and Mayr is mistaken that organisms do more contstructing during speciation than allopatry warrants, and it is the engineered(sic!(likely mistake in evo literature))effect of abiota (as well as the living contructs) then there may be indeed still a nested relation of clades and molecular phylogenies but still it was an intelligent god that did the construction individually first. Sex might also be instructed when not mathematical.When I first took a course on molecular evolution at Cornell I had not thought all the above paragraph through and I had thought then that the only reply was about the molecular clock but this is not strictly true if there is a significant amount of coconstruction between organisms and environments that Mayr denies. Mayr does this for ornithological and philosophical reasons its seems rather than letting a theoretical possibilty overwhelm any speculation. I will demonstrate that Percy might be mistaken on "autonomously" later.

They are possibly categorized as erroneous from a simple semantic information transfer concept wherein language is conceived in fintistic Chomskian formations of bounded contructions but not if they are opposites that determine an outside that is currently "above" the present consensus science horizon. The perfection is only a problem for those who think independence , no matter the probability, applies to both beyond and above this horizon whereinstead the horizon should be reworked such that the perfection is found in how the instruction interactively interacts between abiota and biota and informs the math, that IS perfect, and by GOD I needlessly add.Working out what the opposities ARE NOT formely is some determination of electrons and photons not the simple signs we use to mark a location in internal celluar space by "A","G","C","T". One needs only hold to Crick's notion of a real "force" that streches whatever signs sign for. Thus the baramin and like kinds of ideas AFTER THE KIND may indeed be "hybrid" in two different senses of the word, one as used in biology and the other as used in logic where Kant wrote on the four figure subtility based on not errors in DNA copies but 1-D symmetries still to be named but formerly "ad hoc" for what adapation adapts to and from. It would explain how the earthworm has a freshwater kidney but lives on land. I dont feel like spending my whole time on the underground so I hope the logic is what is focused on rather than the soma that disseminates the same as this would entail explaining away aposteriori feedback throughs, too much for one guy to do on my budget.This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 02-23-2006 02:15 PM