I would add that Michael Behe, who is responsible for the claim that
some biological structures are "irreducibly complex", does _not_ believe that
this "proves evolution to be impossible." He would say that it shows that
current evolutionary theories are _incomplete_, which is quite different. (& of
course even the latter statement is subject to serious challenge.)
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
"The Science-Theology Interface"
Shuan Rose wrote:
> Dear Sondra,
> A major discussion of the "intelligent design" debate, involving all the
> major players, can be found at this link
> http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/nhmag.html
> I can tell you that his " law" is anything but, and I will leave it to the
> experts on this list to give their opinion. If you read the discussion, and
> follow up the links, you will know all you need to know about the current
> debate.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
> Behalf Of Sondra Brasile
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 12:23 PM
> To: asa@calvin.edu
> Subject: irreducible complexity
>
> Dear Members,
>
> My hubby heard that "irreducible complexity proves evolution to be
> impossible". He has accepted this as 'law', I'm not so easily convinced.
> Could any of you help me understand this claim and what makes it possible or
> impossible?
>
> Thank you,
> Sondra
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 12 2002 - 13:23:19 EDT