At 06:07 AM 1/11/00 +0800, Steve wrote:
Thanks for your comments.
Miller was not himself the party guilty of mistranslation. He
cites two authorities, *both* of which had the mis-translation.
The most authoritative was also the first, published in 1913.
The second authority Miller cites was published in 1951. Most
likely this source just copied the translation error from the
1913 source. Anyway, I don't think one can really fault Miller
for not reading the original when a translation was available
from a reputable authority.
Also, Yockey has published his conclusions now in a reputable
H. P. Yockey, 1997. "Walther Lob, Stanley L. Miller and
Prebiotic 'Building Blocks' in the Silent Electrical
Discharge," <Perspectives in Biology and Medicine>,
>On Sun, 09 Jan 2000 19:51:07 -0800, Brian D Harper wrote:
>BH>Let me take a slight detour here. One often hears claims about how
>>there is some sort of "cover up" of difficulties with the origin
>>of life. Nothing could be further from the truth. In the above
>>we have two examples where Stanley Miller performed experiments
>>which could potentially severely undermine the current theories
>>on the origin of life. These two examples are (1) the experiment
>>Steve refers to above and (2) experiments on the slightly reducing/
>>neutral environments which experts now generally agree comprised
>>the Earth's early atmosphere. These second set of experiments I
>>refer to show at least a two order of magnitude decrease in yields
>>as well as a significant decrease in variety of amino acids produced.
>>We often hear these results reported by creationists and might get
>>the idea that they were somehow involved in the work. Actually, they
>>would never even know about it if Miller hadn't published the
>>results. This I believe shows science working the way its supposed
>I agree with Brian that the competing schools do expose difficulties with
>the opposition's theories and creationist's benefit from this.
>But note that *only* materialistic-naturalistic theories are allowed to be
>discussed. So there is a "cover up" of a sort which tries to suppress
>discussion of Intelligent Design or Creationist theories.
Walter Bradley has attended (and presented papers) at several OOL
meetings. He also has at least one paper published in the principal
journal for OOL research. In addition, I have seen several books
and papers which reference Bradley and Thaxton's book. There is
no mention of it being a "creationist" book.
Brian Harper | "If you don't understand
Associate Professor | something and want to
Applied Mechanics | sound profound, use the
The Ohio State University | word 'entropy'"
| -- Morrowitz
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 10 2000 - 18:49:55 EST