>> . . . My answer (if that is indeed your position) is (1) The main way I
>> meld
>> the two ideas of both Darwinian selection, and God's involvement in
>> creation is that God's hand must be involved in each mutation. . . .
>
>What does "involved" mean? Caused? If so, in what way did God cause each
>mutation? Did He cause entities to behave within the limits of their
>natural properties and thus strictly follow the physical and stochastic
>laws or not?
From a Calvinist viewpoint, it seems reasonable to suppose that the exact
events were determined by the initial design of the universe, similar to
the moon verse example. The exact means could involve undiscovered natural
laws or else divine fiat for the apparently random events (e.g., which
radioactive nucleotide will decay at what instant to cause the radiation to
cause a particular mutation). A more Arminian view could have certain
events indeterminate. The events are also sustained and concurred by God.
>If *so*, then unless one simply (and unjustifiably) assumes a continuous,
>uninterrupted and very steep positive selection slope (i.e. which, being
>continuous, requires that one assume that there is no irreducible
>complexity), there very well may not have been enough time between the
>formation of life and the appearance of such features as the trilobite eye
>to produce such staggering complexity.
Without suitable criteria to detect irreducible complexity, assuming that
there is none is not totally unjustifiable. With our present knowledge of
biochemical evolution, it is very hard to rule out anything.
The first evidence for life is around 3.5 to maybe 3.8 billion years and
the first trilobites appear about 540 million. However, what is really
needed to determine the rate of evolution is detailed information on early
trilobite eyes. I do not know what research has been done on the Early
Cambrian species. The agnostids, a major early group, were blind, but I do
not think that they are thought to be ancestral to any of the species with
eyes. They might provide hints on the ancestral condition of the cuticle.
David C.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 05 2000 - 15:08:11 EDT