From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. (dfsiemensjr@juno.com)
Date: Sun Sep 28 2003 - 19:42:28 EDT
Jay,
Flagella seem to be a big thing among ID/IC advocates. We know that
several genes are involved in producing the materials necessary for
flagellar assembly. We do not know that we have a complete set, nor
precisely what most of them do. Mechanism is difficult to tease out,
though we're getting better at it. We know about a number of other gene
products in protozoa, essentially because they belong to the same family
of genes encountered in other kingdoms. As to analogs among other
protozoa, we have so far sequenced one species, /Plasmodium falciparum/,
with a little more sequencing of part of another malarial parasite for
comparative purposes. However, these sequenced species are sporozoans, a
different phylum or subphylum from flagellates. In the face of how little
is known about protozoan genes, to claim that the lack of explanation of
flagella shows that they were inserted from without is about as clear a
case of /ad ignorantiam/ as I am likely to find. I submit that a fallacy
is a poor foundation for a dogma. But then dogmas are more easily
formulated with little or no basis.
In your claim about a "random product of natural laws," you are assuming
that orderly process can always be detected, and that anything that
follows natural law is unguided. Neither assumption is correct. The
decimal value of pi meets all known tests for randomness, but is as
rigorously determined as anything can be. Second, Luther already
recognized that natural law is God's hidden guidance, the "masks."
However, to claim no more than that God does it is void of explanatory
power. To deny divine guidance is deism, process theology (/pace/
Griffin), etc., not biblical theism. Still, it is popularly argued by YEC
that natural processes proceed independently, on their own. This is
exactly what metaphysical naturalism holds, and what you are arguing. If
you cannot differentiate theism from materialism, you've defaulted to
atheism.
Dave
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 13:20:37 -0400 "Jay Willingham"
<jaywillingham@cfl.rr.com> writes:
> The law has a saying, "res ipsa loquitor", e.g. "the thing speaks
> for
> itself".
>
> To say that man was not made in the image of God and is merely a
> random
> product of natural laws over time gives a mighty tool or proof to
> those who
> declare their race of men or their level of intelligence/reasoning
> speed as
> rightfully dominant of other races or mental capacities.
>
> The experience of technocracy (that the brightest are therefore the
> best,
> Marxism/socialism) has shown empirically that intelligence is not a
> marker
> for wisdom. In fact a case could be made that intelligence begets
> pride
> which is the enemy of wisdom.
>
> I did not say ID was nonsense, I simply asked for examples.
>
> To say there are too many examples of ID nonsense to summarize even
> one of
> them makes me wonder just who is being nonsensical.
>
> Jay Willingham
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Sep 28 2003 - 19:46:18 EDT