At 07:20 PM 12/6/96 EST, Jim wrote:
>Brian D. Harper writes:
>
><<It seems to me that the common sense and shared experience of
>most practicing scientists, especially those knowledgeable in the
>appropriate fields (i.e. those with the longest robes), is that evolution
>is a fact. So, it seems to me that you really should be giving us
>reasons for resisting the inherent inertia of shared experience and
>common sense rather than arguing that we should just go with the
>flow.>>
>
JB:==
>You mistake shared experience with shared belief. Have you experienced
>biological evolution? Did you used to be a mollusk?
>
>Seriously, that's the difference. No one has shared the "experience" of
>macroevolution. It's a belief. Your inertia is self-imposed, an a priori
>mistake. It's time to move...on.
>
BH:==
><<We have a great deal of experience with and knowledge of intelligent
>designers capable of making watches. Very little with intelligent
>designers capable of making turtles.>>
>
JB:==
>Really? Is it because you don't *see* the intelligent designer at work on
>turtles? Or is there another reason.
>
Jim, it is absolutely amazing that you could write this immediately
after writing your paragraph above about macroevolution. I had
thought we might have a reasonable discussion. It seems I'm
just wasting my time. Bye.
><<Watches and turtles are not the same, even my daughters can tell the
>difference.>>
>
>I trust your daughters, when asked which is the more complicated system, would
>opt for the turtle. But your reasoning seems to be the more complicated design
>has less intelligence behind it.
>
>Go figure.
>
Brian Harper | "If you don't understand
Associate Professor | something and want to
Applied Mechanics | sound profound, use the
The Ohio State University | word 'entropy'"
| -- Morrowitz
Bastion for the naturalistic |
rulers of science |