From: Chris Cogan <ccogan@telepath.com>
>The following little essay was written for another list, but it is relevant
>to the topic of this list, so I reproduce it here. It was originally
>written in response to the old creationist canard that complex organization
>cannot be obtained from random processes. The idea is that this would be
>like the parts of a BMW miraculously assembling themselves. Of course,
>though the evolutionary process involves a kind of randomness, it is not
>even *remotely* like such a miraculous occurrence, as should be clear from
>this essay, if not from ten seconds thought.
[...]
Thanks, Chris, for another enlightening essay. It will, of course, be
useless for convincing creationists of their error. Those who are incapable
of appreciating the standard arguments regarding the origin of complexity
via random variation and natural selection will not appreciate your more
subtle argument either.
>... But randomness *is*
>complexity, though not all complexity is what we would call randomness.
This is also (part of) Dembski's position, so IDers should be willing to
accept it. However, they can be quite selective, accepting an argument when
it suits their purpose and rejecting the same argument when it doesn't.
Richard Wein (Tich)
"The truth is incontrovertible. Panic may resent it; ignorance may deride
it; malice may distort it; but there it is." -- Winston Churchill
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 11 2000 - 10:11:43 EDT