Re: Re: Re: Evolution is alive and well

Glenn R. Morton (grmorton@waymark.net)
Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:26:16 -0500

Hi Moorad,

At 01:43 PM 10/21/98 -0500, Moorad Alexanian wrote:
>Physics deals with the whole of the physical universe with the great
>exception of living beings. I keep telling my students that physics is easy,
>they still do not believe me!! What I keep saying is that physics is the
>prototype for all sciences. Physics does work with complex systems where
>collective effects, like superfluidity, ferromagnetism, etc., are the result
>of simple interparticle interactions. I am not an anti-evolutionist, a
>young earth scientist nor any such thing.

I know that you are not a YEC, but I had gotten the impression from many of
your posts that you didn't think evolution happened. Maybe I was wrong.
But, one could say the same about evolution as you do about physics.
evolutionary theory predicts the behavior of an ecosystem (collective
effect) in its prediction of species formation, splitting etc. but can't
predict the state of a single particle (a species) any more than physics
can predict the state of the individual electron in a wire, but it can
predict the current, if given the voltage and resistance.

I am just trying to understand
>what evolutionary theory is and how it differs from physics. This is to
>contrast the two subjects and is not meant to denigrate evolutionary theory.
>But people in the latter make all sorts of claims without any evidence
>whatsoever. Even while watching ordinary animal programs on TV one hears the
>constant use of evolutionary ideas to describe all sorts of animal behavior.
>For instance, that lions want to see their genes be preserve. What the hell
>does a lion know about genes! The real question is, aren't lions behaving as
>very sophisticated computers? Are they programmed? Are they designed?

They are designed, but indirectly IMO.
>

>The problem posed by evolutionists is a very difficult one. However one
>should not confuse their working assumptions with established facts. That is
>my main point.

It is a fact that the oldest rocks have no modern forms of life--none.
That is a fact. The change does not seem to have occurred in the fashion
most YECs believe (via a flood) and progressive creation seems to mimick
evolution in all details.
glenn

Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm