first..note that no faulsifyables have been presented/thus evolution is not scientific...in having no faulsifyables..cannot claim to be a science...

further that many/claiming faith in evolution[of genus]..dont understand..the concept[of faulsifyables]...nor the science..thus have belief/faith...not science

evolution therefore is no more than an idea/
a system of belief...a theory...
that decieves...the creation..away from creator

that being said...i would like to return to the observer/changing that observed...it must be noted..that god observes us....

[indeed by virtue..of sustaining each of us life...nessesarilly..is an observer...who simply by his act of observances...changes that he observes

[from inanimate...animate is converted...or to keep it simple...dust is made to live..this is what gods observances have achieved

which is what many messengers[such as swedenberg]..have said all alone who would have thunk it...YE shall call him emmanuel...lol...god within us all

realise god is watching/us...
not from a distance..but from within our inner being

in giving us life..he has made change...is ever changing..yet allways will be/as he allways was[the living/loving grace/mercy/the light/the logic...if it dont make sense...if it dont love...if it isnt most mercyfull..if it isnt living...its not of god

noting even the dust..is active...atoms/with elect-rons..neutrons...etc...

oh how ignorant...blind we can chooose to be
but such is as we are..thus how god can also be..[of course we can strive to overcome our ignorances...and other viles

but just think what could occure...if we convince god,,,he dont egsist
why the universe will simply collapse in within itself...till in time with a big bang...god/emanuel/within..begins the whole thing all over AGAIN

anyhow...there is no evidences either way
some claim their faith in love/good/grace/mercy...
seeking the light

others claim their faith in the darkness/the dust/man/flesh
but it is written...one cannot serve two masters

[one has logus/logic...life/love...natu-real/nurture
the other little white deceptions...under the veil of science...

its easy to claim disbelief...
but remember..some-one is watching/
loving you...all the same...

love provides its own faulsiyable/failsafe
[where loves isnt..there is hate]..[lies/deception/fear/blame/shame]

if you see hate[etc]...
the lover/..cause of causes..is not there...
as affect/yet remains the nature/nurture..of the cause...

thats not quite correct/
but only god is perfect

Dan,

Perhaps we can compromise on a common (organic)creation. What it does not suggest is that species appear at regular intervals with the handedness odds being like flipping a coin. Instead, the DNA handedness trait is being inherited.

I haven't had opportunity to have a close look at Z-DNA (OUG) but it seems that it is a transient torsal structure which is not the stable Watson & Crick DNA structure.

I have come across the handedness matter more than once. Probably, the best known genetist to cite the case is Spencer Wells, the guy who is working the National Geographic Society to use DNA trace human migration patterns over thousands of years. Paul Davies, though outside his field, as mentions it too.

.

DID YOU SAY TRUTH ?

.

Off the cuff, I would say that truth is information that has not been voluntarily deformed at the time of emission.

Or, should I say it is whatever version of reality a particular individual is capable of transmitting without voluntarily deforming it.

It is a concept that has no existence beyond humanity.

That, of course, does not discourage many Abrahamists from claiming that tuth and the large idol are one and the same, which, I suppose, is one way of saying we are basically all quite rubbery really.

.

Banjo,

Reality can be elusive. Karl Popper used the example of looking at an object through a microscope at various/different magnification is any visualisation more real than any other? We are really seeing only part of the elephant at any one time.

oliver...quote..<<Perhaps/we can compromise..on a common..(organic)creation.>>...them is big sounding words

organic creation...lol...
now there is a biased compromise...lol

for those confused/with big words...

organic=of the flesh...thus what oliver...'proposes'...is a victory...for accidental/evolutionary/chance creation...ie..the 'compromise''..excludes logus.../logic..ie..[not a devine/creator]

not..a natural/designer...using logic...that spoke all living into being...

great words...oliver..lol..poor compromise though

<<What it does not suggest is/that species appear at regular intervals>>.there should be a joinder...but lets go with the clear error...in your last line

the SCIENCE of genetics...rebuts you...IN that species...fluctuate...between their genus/mean

not to mention/your fellow/genus evolutionists...who claim...species mutation...[small mutations=huge mutations..into new genus

thus both sides...should reject the biased compromise/but i love the clever use of words...and the joinders you so intelectually joined together[you should work for some politition...talk about gloss/spin

but you compound the two previous errors..with this..<<with the handedness odds being like flipping a coin.>>>when handedness is in fact a standard...[not...'like'/flipping a coin at all

but i might have you wrong/on the last point...but its hard to read/think...im laughing so hard..

<<Instead, the DNA handedness trait is being inherited.>>clearly...its a standard...any/not being..'right'...naturally fail...via survival/..of the fit-test...its inheritable...for sure/cause anthing not dies

<<Z-DNA/it seems that it/is a transient torsal structure..which is not..the stable Watson & Crick DNA/structure>>>

ok im no expert either...but my reading of it/was...its the active state..of dna..[when it uncoils..to/create rna...that creates ensimes/for egsample.

..<<..use's/DNA/to trace human migration patterns...over thousands of years...Paul Davies,>>>again im not sure/either...but in evolutionary terms...a few thousand years..is the wrong/scale..for evolution of genus

im recalling the last..topic/..you...i think it was/raised paddymelon's....10 million years...linked/with parental/dna....

my point being/..humans are less than a million years/old...[80.000 years...or maybe 100,000...according to true science...

but our diversity/dna wise...is over 5000 mutations..but its reassuring to know we share/..50 percent of our dna with a bannana

im still getting over/how a circular dna/ie bacteria...flattend out into spiral...[lol...evolved...out of spiral/bacteria...into what?..

yet in spiral..the dna concept for bacteria...simply speaking..becomes troublsome

no doudt/some expert..will explain it all...sometime

though outside his field, as mentions it too.

OUG,

My reply to Dan was on the basis that, if I recall correctly, he believes his God works through science and the Earth is much older than 10,000 years. Herein, I was saying ID or non-ID, stable handedness in DNA indicates a common ancestor. If there had been multiple creation points, there should be left-handed and right-handed stable DNA. The absence of handedness in stable DNA ,suggests any hypothetical Creator is not inteferring with a process started once a long time ago or that there was a single biological happening, by chance or by the innate self-organising properties of the universe.