Re: Bob DeHaan wrote:

Moorad Alexanian (alexanian@UNCWIL.EDU)
Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:39:16 -0500 (EST)

At 04:31 PM 10/17/98 -0600, John W Burgeson wrote:
>Bob DeHaan wrote: "To compare Darwin's "theory" with Newton's laws of
>gravity or laws of motion is a bit of a stretch, IMHO. Where is the
>mathematics underlying Darwinian theory? Where are the precise
>predictions that are at all comparable to what can be made from Newton's
>laws?"
>
>Unfair comparison, I think. Predictions are not the only attribute of a
>science.
>
>Below I've appended a book review on Casti's SEARCH FOR CERTAINTY that
>addresses this question.
>
> Burgy

I quote from "The Physics of Chance" by Charles Ruhla. On Page 1 Ruhla's
section 1.1 is titled "Prediction = science." I quote from that section. "It
is often thought that science is an explanation of the world. Though this is
an important feature, it is not the most characteristic: the overriding
priority in science is prediction."

Moorad