Re: Stereotypes and reputations

From: <tpi.hormel@comcast.net>
Date: Mon Aug 08 2005 - 12:07:58 EDT

Gordon Brown:
> I assume that you [Glenn] mean (neo)-Darwinian evolution
> rather than evolution in general. I can imagine an
> atheist remaining one if he finds fault with the
> Darwinian mechanism but not if he comes out against
> all possible theories of evolution. What other options
> does he have? Some natural phenomenon that creates
> complex life instantaneously with no intermediate steps?
> A universe (and perhaps earth) that have always been
> here and always contained complex life like us? That
> would sidestep the question of how we got here, but
> even back when it might have been possible to believe
> that the earth had always existed, I would think that
> an atheist would have assumed that complex life had
> to arise from something simpler, but then there would
> be the question of how simple is simple enough.

Hello Glenn & Gordon.
I would limit the scope to cover the evolution of life *on Earth*. An atheist is not inherently compelled to assume that life evolved *here*. For example, there are some people who theorize that Earth was seeded by extraterrestrials. Behe's idea of a universal organism that was programmed to develop into the species we see today is indistinguishable from potential alien terraforming models. Hoyle thought infectious interstellar viruses produced from a 'life cloud' directed life's transformations.

So, if we confine ourselved to the more immediate and less 'cosmic' questions regarding the history of life on Earth, I think Glenn's comments hold up.

Regards,
Tim I
Received on Mon Aug 8 12:09:23 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Aug 08 2005 - 12:09:24 EDT