[...]
>
>[...]
>
>>SC>Note, I do not say that this is known fact. Rather, I simply
>>wish to point out that the theory of evolution can, in fact,
>>include a model for prebiotic evolution.
>
>SJ>Unless some sort of detailed mechanism is specified, it is
>>vacuous. For example, if "evolution" means simply "change through
>>time", as the California Science Framework defines it (Johnson P.E.,
>>"Darwin on Trial", 1993, p145), then by definition it is true, even
>>tautologous.
>
>BH>And now I will hold you to your own criteria. Please specify for
>>me the detailed mechanisms used by the Intelligent Designer. If you
>>cannot do this then I will have to conclude that your so-called
>>Intelligent Design model is vacuous.
>
>SJ>No. The "Intelligent Design model" does specifiy a "mechanism", the
>word of command of the "Intelligent Designer':
>
>"And God said, `Let there be...,' and there was..." (Gn 1:3,6,9,
>11,14,20,24,26); "By the word of the LORD were the heavens made,
>their starry host by the breath of his mouth" (Ps 33:6); In the
>beginning was the Word...Through him all things were made; without
>him nothing was made that has been made." (Jn 1:1-3).
>
OK, fine, but it is not necessary for ID to appeal to God. Earlier
we were discussing panspermia and you mentioned that you were
confident that a civilization capable of designing and building
interstellar space craft would also likely be able to create life.
So, what I'm interested in knowing is what mechanisms would such
a civilization use to create life. If you can't specifiy these
then this panspermia variant is, according to your line of reasoning
above, vacuous.
Brian Harper
Associate Professor
Applied Mechanics
Ohio State University
"Aw, Wilbur" -- Mr. Ed