In a message dated 10/5/2000 7:29:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
DNAunion@aol.com writes:
> >Richard Wein: I think it's unwise to place too much reliance on this paper
> by Thornhill and Ussery. Their definition of irreducible complexity seems
> to
> me to be
> just as problematic as Behe's. I've yet to see any definition of IC which
> defines the meaning of "parts" or "components" in an adequate way.
>
> DNAunion: And I've yet to see an adequate and universally definition of
> life, evolution, and species. So does that mean that these too do not
> exist?
>
>
>
Because we have direct evidence of the "evolution" of life and species and
mutation and natural selection. IC however is based on elimination. That's
quite a difference. In the case of IC definition and clear definition is very
important since design is infered through the absence of a Darwinian
mechanism.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 05 2000 - 22:58:20 EDT