@wycats don’t agree with macro evolution, but I do think use of evolution (micro) is a good illustration. https://twitter.com/codylindley/status/598859326317432832 … like it!
-
-
@wycats Was just simply saying I like the evolution (me micro, you macro) illustration for the web v.s. get off my lawn don’t change the web -
@codylindley Yah. I was trying to understand why you wanted to make the distinction. Wasn't meant as a needling. -
@wycats Right, because web evolves the way only the web can. It does not evolve into say, a satellite. i.e. Irreducible complexity applies -
@codylindley Nah. See WebASM. -
@wycats - So, WebASM has a traceable evolution. Nods. No hidden changes, which are assumed yet untestable.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
One can still be agnostic on mechanism and 'why?' even if one doubts macro evolution accounts for total variety we find
@wycats@codylindley -
@rdrake98@codylindley the reason I said "TLDR creationism" is that intelligent design is guided macro-ev, not rejection of macro. -
-
@codylindley@rdrake98 I can respect guided macro-evolution (although it's also unfalsifiable). Seems dangerously "God of the Gaps" though. -
-
@codylindley@rdrake98 We can agree there are gaps ;) But we have a history of filling some of them in. -
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.