Exact : The Program, CDROM, CDROM reader, and 3D printer all in one in a single cell is over simplification.
It is far far more complex mechanisms that cannot emerge from random mutations.
Evolution is a fact we can all see, but the engine of evolution (random mutations) is an unproven theory.
For those who have curiosity, and most engineers should have :
Michael Behe was challenged by "Evolution a theory in crisis" by M. Denton
Your portrayal of evolutionary processes oversimplifies the intricate dynamics at play. While you emphasize the complexity of cellular mechanisms, suggesting that such complexity cannot arise from "random mutations" alone, you overlook the essential role of natural selection. This process is anything but random; it is the methodical mechanism through which advantageous traits are favored over time, shaping complex biological forms.
Moreover, referencing Michael Behe's concept of "irreducible complexity" and Michael Denton's "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis" does little to undermine the robust body of empirical evidence supporting evolutionary theory. These critiques, while provocative, have been extensively rebutted in peer-reviewed research. The consensus among biologists is clear and based on a wide array of studies—from genetic sequencing to fossil records—that collectively validate evolutionary theory.
To dismiss evolutionary biology as an "unproven theory" is to ignore the comprehensive and corroborative data gathered over decades. Such a stance not only misrepresents the nature of scientific inquiry, where theories are continually tested and refined but also underestimates the adaptive power of natural processes documented in both the laboratory and the wild.
Evolution is a fact we can all see, but the engine of evolution (random mutations) is an unproven theory.
For those who have curiosity, and most engineers should have : Michael Behe was challenged by "Evolution a theory in crisis" by M. Denton