6th January 2011 - 05:43 AM
Its almost completely innumerate in that it claims 6 is not "real" and the only real numbers are the prime numbers. That's a straw-man argument based on a highly restrictive definition of number. Its use of "continuous" is also mistaken as not even the dense set of rational numbers are continuous.
The physics content is a lie based on the Bohr model and ignoring quantum mechanics and quantum electrodynamical models. What is quantised is the eigenvalues of the energy, not the position of the electron.
The comment about big molecules only being found as the result of biological processes inside a cell is incorrect, since clay and other inorganic compounds have astronomical molecular weights -- if anything, the point better made is about Man's ignorance and the underdeveloped state of inorganic chemistry knowledge. It's a false dichotomy illustrated by they don't have a rule to divide the world of molecules. Likewise, multi-cellular life has an obvious spectrum of forms, including 2-cell clumps and small clumps of relatively undifferentiated cells.
But in ignorance the author argues (poorly) that today
we should see 5-cell or 7-cell organisms which ignores both the biological development of form by cell divisions and relative specialization and
the principle of natural selection which penalizes life for inelegant and expensive schemes that might result in 5-cell forms.
Gaps between forms is caused by natural selection forcing populations to diverge from one another via speciation. Only from a complete ignorance of biological history would one expect to see a continuum of form in the present-day biological world. Where you see your gradations finest is when you look in terms of time
as well spatially.
Gaps in the fossil record are natural since it is an incomplete record but one subject to future discoveries as exploration continues. Not only are transitional forms found, they are found in the expected places. What more need be said?
Most of these ideas are old.http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB010_1.html
(Complexity of life today does not imply life in past was equally complex)http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB805.html
(Gaps between populations today do not imply gaps in the past)http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB922.html
(Number of transitional fossils)http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC201.html
(Gaps in time and fossil record)http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH350.html
(The so-called gaps between kinds don't seem to hold up to examination)http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo1...peciation.shtmlhttp://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/line...tribution.shtmlhttp://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/misc...s/IICgaps.shtml
Importantly even creationists demonstrate that there is a continuum in ape-human fossils.http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/compare.html
In short, the "math logic" was based on misconceptions about the evolution of how forms appear. This subject, the evolution of biological development of form has a catchy subject title EvoDevo.