On Tue, 4 Jun 1996 05:37:09 -0400, Bill Hamilton wrote:
BH>Steve Jones wrote to Brian Harper
>SJ>No. I "admitted" that "change over time" occurred, but this could
>be the result of *progressive creation*. To date you have not given
>a "*unique*, non-circular, definition of `macro-evolution' ", let
>alone showed that it occurred.
>BH>Note the use of the past tense in Steve's final sentence.
>Perhaps it comes from Brian's definition of macro-evolution (origin
>of novelty) earlier. Thus the place to look for macroevolution is
>in the fossil record.
SJ>Agreed that the "the fossil record" is "the place to look for
>macroevolution", but even that is not conclusive. For example,
>the large-scale changes observed in "the fossil record" could be
>caused by the progressive supernatural intervention of an exogenous
>intelligent designer.
BH>[Mark Ridley quote snipped]
BH>My point was that the fundamental process which makes
>macroevolution possible -- speciation -- has been observed. I was
>wrong in calling speciation macroevolution. Nevertheless, if
>speciation occurs, it would be difficult to rule out macroevolution.
>And speciation does occur.
That is like saying that if death "occurs, it would be difficult to
rule out" resurrection! :-)
The fact that reproductive isolation (ie. speciation) is a
*necessary* factor in so-called "macroevolution", ie. the origin of
basic designs (see my previous message), does not make it a
*sufficient* factor or even the *efficient* factor. That reptiles
and birds can diversify into distinct species, does not explain how a
reptile became a bird.
Denton points out the fallacy of confusing scales:
"However attractive the extrapolation, it does not necessarily follow
that, because a certain degree of evolution has been shown to occur
therefore any degree of evolution is possible. There is obviously an
enormous difference between the evolution of a colour change in a
moth's wing and the evolution of an organ like the human brain, and
the differences among the fruit flies of Hawaii, for example, are
utterly trivial compared with the differences between a mouse and an
elephant, or an octopus and a bee. While, admittedly, the adaptive
radiations such as have occurred on oceanic archipelagos seem
remarkably analogous to the great adaptive radiations of the major
groups such as the mammals and the dinosaurs, there is an enormous
difference in scale.
Whatever the merits of the extrapolation may be in biology, there are
certainly many instances outside biology where such an extrapolation
is clearly invalid. where large scale "macro" changes can only be
accounted for by invoking radically different sorts of processes from
those responsible for more limited "micro" types of change. The
sorts of phenomena such as the movement of high and low pressure
systems which account for the "micro" day-to-day changes in the
weather are quite incapable of explaining longer term "macro' changes
such as the cycle of the seasons. This long-range periodic climatic
pattern can only be explained by invoking astronomical factors, such
as the tilt of the Earth's axis which shifts successively the
northern, then the southern, hemisphere towards the sun as the Earth
orbits the sun each year."
(Denton M., "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis", Burnett Books: London,
1985, p87)
BH>By macroevolution I do not mean the naturalistic version Steve
>insists on.
Then it is not "macroevolution", in the accepted scientific sense,
Bill. It is just confusing the issue further by investing a
naturalistic scientific term with a special, non-naturalistic
meaning. You can do this, but unless you define your terms clearly,
it becomes a verbal shell game! :-)
BH>Steve's definition of evolution seems to me to include
>metaphysical baggage that is not scientific. As I've said before I
>would rather point out to scientists the metaphysical baggage in
>their assumptions than condemn their research.
What a strange term (ie. "metaphysical baggage") for a theist to
describe a fellow theist's belief that "the origin of novelty" was
supernatural, and then to use the same term for non-theistic
"scientists"! I might ask Bill, using your own term, what is
*your* "metaphysical baggage" then? :-)
And this is just the pot calling the kettle `black', Bill! :-) *I*
am using the word "macroevolution" *in the accepted scientfic sense
of the word*. It is *you* who are giving it a special meaning that
no one in the mainstream scientific world would grant, if they knew
that is the way you were using it.
Moreover, where did I "condemn their research"? Granted, I believe
that trying to prove a fully naturalistic origin of life is doomed to
failure (and hence to some extent a waste of taxpayers dollars), but
I have no problems with scientists carrying out "research" into same,
providing their simulation experiments do not depend on the "crucial
but illegitimate role of the investigator" (Thaxton C.B., Bradley
W.L. & Olsen R.L., "The Mystery of Life's Origin", Lewis & Stanley:
Dallas TX, 1992, p185), and they honestly report their findings.
Indeed, it is such findings, when honestly reported, that
consistently support the PC position!
All I *condemn* is the *materialistic-naturalistic metaphysics* of
"scientists" (*not* the scientists themselves), which assumes in the
question of *origins* that there is no Creator, when the very
"made-ness" of created things, plainly shows them that there is (Rom
1:20).
God bless.
Steve
----------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Jones ,--_|\ sjones@iinet.net.au |
| 3 Hawker Ave / Oz \ http://www.iinet.net.au/~sjones/ |
| Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ phone +61 9 448 7439. (These are |
| Perth, Australia v my opinions, not my employer's) |
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Jones ,--_|\ sjones@iinet.net.au |
| 3 Hawker Ave / Oz \ http://www.iinet.net.au/~sjones/ |
| Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ phone +61 9 448 7439. (These are |
| Perth, Australia v my opinions, not my employer's) |
----------------------------------------------------------------