I can only quote Behe and retire:
"Even when given time, evolutionists always present examples that
require intelligent intervention"
Trucks have not evolved in the darwinian sense. That's just a fact.
Please, read my original message about Schrondinger's and Berra's Folly.
Chao,
____________________
Re: intell. des. and Berra's folly
EGM wrote:
> In that case Glenn is at least misapplying the example. And in that
> case, would you (or any other) be so kind as to tell us what part or
> parts of the world economy are I.C. and which also evolved without I.
> interventions?
Here's one example of an irreducibly complex sub-system of the modern
economy (and a very important one to the functioning of the whole):
Trucks are assembled out of many different, separately manufactured,
parts. The manufacture and delivery of those parts, in turn, depends
upon the existence of working trucks.
One strategy for self-organization of IC systems is as follows: start
with a large number of initially autonomous "agents" which can
interact.
Increasingly complex interactions are encouraged because they allow the
agents to achieve their goals more efficiently. (This could conceivably
be implemented in hardware or in software.) Under the right conditions,
an irreducibly complex system of interactions could evolve.
Glenn's clever insight is not that the modern economy is a perfect
example of this strategy, but rather, that the development of the
modern
economy is an extremely good analogy of this strategy. (At least,
that's how I've always understood it.) It is familiar, it is
instructive, and it is suggestive. (In fact, it is such a good analogy
that it's probably more instructive than most *actual* implementations
would be.)
Consider the development of truck manufacturing. No one planned the
modern IC system of parts manufacture, delivery, and assembly. It
"evolved" from a simple beginning via independent agents acting on
available resources over time to maximize the attaining of certain
goals. This is instructive, and suggestive, for how similar complex
organizations could be accomplished by mechanistic "agents." (Of
course, such agents would have to be cleverly designed to make such
self-assembly possible.)
Loren Haarsma
==
EGM
"in ipso enim vivimus et movemur et sumus sicut"
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com