Re: Evolution of proteins in sequence space

From: Howard J. Van Till (
Date: Wed Aug 08 2001 - 09:09:17 EDT

  • Next message: "Re: Evolution of proteins in sequence space (correction)"

    Bert says:

    > I am NOT arguing for "progessive creation."(pc) I am asking Howard to provide
    > with something specific to support his views of one creation fully embodied
    > life.

    Bert, if you're asking for an airtight _proof_ you will be disappointed.
    Neither science nor theology can offer proofs (in the strict logical sense)
    of its positions. Both can, however, offer a number of 'evidences' or lines
    of argumentation that build a case for favoring one theory or proposition
    over another.

    I suppose I could collect such a list from what I have written in various
    essays, book chapters, books, etc. But before I do that I would like to have
    some idea concerning which of my publications you have already read
    (apparently without being convinced).



    By the way, Bert, when you say that:

    "But, if I DID want to argue for "progressive creation", then I would need
    to point to instances where the evidence strongly points to the inability
    of"evolutionary" mechanisms to accomplish the development. This is the
    agenda of "design" theory where "irriducible complexity" (IC)
    is put forth as just this. The IC folks see IC all about so I would suppose
    that they feel that pc is prevelant action."

    you are correctly seeing the ID movement for what it is -- a movement that
    argues for the inadequacy of the system of natural causes and the necessity
    of occasional episodes of form-conferring supernatural action -- otherwise
    called "progressive creationism." ID = DI, where DI = Divine Intervention.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 08 2001 - 09:20:35 EDT