Re: [asa] FYI: Arrogance, dogma and why science - not faith - is the new enemy of

From: John Walley <john_walley@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue Aug 21 2007 - 09:04:31 EDT

In the case of malaria you have both of what you need, variation and selection. And agreed you have a mechanism as well.

But Behe is correct when he observes that at least in the case of malaria "evolution doesn't do very much".

John

----- Original Message ----
From: PvM <pvm.pandas@gmail.com>
To: John Walley <john_walley@yahoo.com>
Cc: AmericanScientificAffiliation <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 10:34:22 PM
Subject: Re: [asa] FYI: Arrogance, dogma and why science - not faith - is the new enemy of

But mechanisms for adding complexity exist, all that is needed is
variation and selection. So your objection seems to be flawed. There
are mechanisms for evolution, although I am not sure what you mean by
naturalistic evolution...

On 8/20/07, John Walley <john_walley@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Of course random mutation is observed in nature. You must have missed the
> "what Darwinism purports it to do part".
>
> Why would we expect new complexity to be added? Maybe because that is the
> heart of Darwinian evolution that we are discussing. If there is no
> mechanism for adding complexity, life would still be protocells or as Behe
> says, Designed.
>
> Vacuous goes both ways. It is logically vacuous to defend naturalistic
> evolution without any mechanism for it.
>
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
> Behalf Of PvM
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 12:42 AM
> To: John Walley
> Cc: AmericanScientificAffiliation
> Subject: Re: [asa] FYI: Arrogance, dogma and why science - not faith - is
> the new enemy of
>
> <quote>Regardless, showing that random mutation or other naturalistic
> processes is not observed in nature to do what Darwinism purports it
> to do is valuable and relevant, albeit inconvenient for some, even if
> it is arrived at by theological motivation.</quote>
>
> But random mutation is observed in nature as are many other
> naturalistic processes. I believe that you be surprised to find out
> how concepts of development, variation, selection are very powerful
> natural processes, which are actually observed.
>
> While it may be Behe's goal to show that there are limits to Darwinian
> theory, I feel that he has done little to support your more
> extravagant claim that he has shown that random mutation or other
> naturalistic processes is not observed in nature. In fact, such a
> claim seems rather vacuous. In fact, if you are familiar with Behe, he
> fully accepts that these processes can explain the evolution of life
> however, he insists that some 'intelligence' is still needed to get it
> all started.
> Although, such a position seems strangely self defeating.
>
> JW- This is the "fanciful Darwinian thinking" Behe points out. It
> may be trivial to show how complexity can be produced but it is
> theoretical, just like Behe's Design argument. In the longest running
> empirical study of evolution known to man, that of malaria, zero new
> complexity was added.
>
> What is so theoretical about showing that observed processes of
> variation and chance can explain the increase in complexity and that
> in fact experiments seem to support this. As far as malaria is
> concerned, the interesting strawman is why one would expect new
> complexity to be added? In fact, even that minor claim seems to be
> contradicted by science.
>
> It also seems to me you are inflating a little the 'malaria'
> experiment. Pandasthumb and other science sites have shown clearly
> what is wrong with Behe's claims.
>
> http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/07/reality_1_behe.html
>
> http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/06/of_cilia_and_si.html
>
> So how does Behe explain all this?
>
> <quote>"Here's something to ponder long and hard: Malaria was
> intentionally designed. The molecular machinery with which the
> parasite invades red blood cells is an exquisitely purposeful
> arrangement of parts."</quote>
>
> Wow...
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Aug 21 09:05:59 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Aug 21 2007 - 09:05:59 EDT