I know I promised I wouldn't respond to any more of Stephen Jones's
nonsense, but this one is just too good to go unmentioned. ;-)
From: Stephen E. Jones <sejones@iinet.net.au>
[...]
>Agreed this is the minimalist ID position. If it turns out that the
flowchart
>for the origin of life from chemicals up to the first living cell can be
>followed by a human level intelligence to create life in vivo, it may be
then
>realised that the task is far beyond the capacity of unintelligent causes.
That
>would be sufficient to establish Intelligent Design.
So, if life can be created in vivo, that would establish ID.
>But it may be that in attempting to do this, it will be found it is beyond
>human level intelligence as well. For example, I was reading the other day
a
>book by a molecular biologist who suggested this might well be the case:
>
> "In these days of astounding advances in science and technology it
> is perhaps rash to declare dogmatically that anything such as the
> artificial synthesis of a living cell is impossible. Yet, on what sort of
> microloom would a biologist weave the membranes of the
> endoplasmic reticulum, or with what delicate needles could a
> biologist fashion the intricacies of the cell nucleus? ...Will it ever be
> possible for a living cell to be constructed from scratch under
> controlled laboratory conditions? Perhaps it is pointless to continue
> with such speculations because there seems to be a step beyond
> which man cannot go-try as he may. (Price F.W., "Basic Molecular
> Biology," 1979, pp.466-467)
>
>If that is the case, and anyone who studies in detail the *fantastic*
>functional complexity of even the simplest bacterial cell would have to
>concede that it *might* be, then it would be even more beyond the
>capacity of unintelligent causes. Then the only option left is a
supernatural
>level of intelligence.
So, if life *cannot* be created in vivo, that would establish ID too!
Richard Wein (Tich)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Aug 05 2000 - 06:16:01 EDT