Elaborate schemes to explain the origin of the genetic code from the laws of physics and chemistry miss the whole point about codes.
A paper likens the proteome to a language with a “quasi-universal grammar” possessing the minimum complexity necessary to function as a cell.
In a previous article I described how scientific training can condition some scientists’ minds to resist the evidence in nature for intelligent design.
Dennis Venema’s arguments about Michael Yarus’s work were already addressed in detail by Meyer and Nelson in a technical paper.
Today I will identify the fundamentally different approaches by ID advocates and critics toward assessing evidence.