Im curious about Atheist's opinions on some new ideas in science

[Sheldon]

@scrappykoala

What in general do you think about these ideas and/or developments.

I think you have offered not one citation, do you imagine you can invoke science in this way, and bluff strangers on the internet? Is this really how you believe scientific methodology rigorously examines ideas and claims? Bless…

Atheism is far higher among scientists, and is vastly higher among elite scientists, can I suggest you email the National Academy of Sciences, and let us know how your unevidenced superstitious claims are received?

@scrappykoala

Do you think that any of these makes the case for unguided processes for explanation of life, complex life and consciousness harder or easier?

What objective evidence can you demonstrate these processes are “guided” in any way? What relevance does complexity have to your claim everything is designed? If it’s all designed then complexity is irrelevant, surely?

Serious question, do you know what an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy is, and what using such a fallacy in informal logic means?

@scrappykoala

There have been experiments and some serious people believe that the cells can decide to have portions of the DNA deliberately error prone. The theory is that in times of serious crisis the cell can decide to have a portion of the DNA filled with some random code. Then it can try and see if it can get what it needs desperately at the time from that random code.

Oddly though atheism is higher among biologists than any other field of scientific endeavour? have you shared your unevidenced superstitious claims with any elite biologists? Please do let us know how they are received.