From: Richard McGough (richard@biblewheel.com)
Date: Sat Jul 26 2003 - 13:25:37 EDT
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Glenn Morton" <glennmorton@entouch.net>
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2003 11:14:31 -0500
>Richard asks:
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
>>Behalf Of Richard McGough
>>Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 11:49 PM
>
>>This is a strange kind of wisdom to be found coming from a
>>scientific view of origins. Can you name any established natural
>>phenomenon that occured exactly once in the history of the earth?
>>This idea seems to contradict the meaning of "natural phenomenon."
>
<complicated philosophic snip>
>The evolution of the tetrapods, radiolarians, foraminifera, dinosaurs etc.
>etc. all happened exactly once.
You seem to be confusing multiple instances of a single phenomenon for single instances of multiple phenomena.
Before going into the details you gave, let me point you back to the core of the argument. Surely you agree that the essence of physical law is *regularity* and repetition. Thats the root of all science. The Laws of Nature describe the regularities. Something that happens just once may well be an example of a Law of Nature, but it is almost certain that it is not the only such example, else we would probably not have noticed it as a Law in the first place.
Each and every phenomenon is *unique* the way you are posing it. The events you listed above - if they really happened - are all *instances* of a single physical phenomenon called evolution. The *phenomenon* itself occurred many times, you yourself list a number of instances.
>
>The Big Bang happened exactly once. Unless one believes in multiple
>universes. :-)
>
Yes, this is the primary example of a unique event, but I don't think it represents unique phenomenon, i.e. the things "going on" in the big bang are taken as examples of natural laws that are going on all around us, the only difference being the temperature, etc.
>To our direct observational knowledge, the Maunder Minimum, a dearth of
>sunspots with the sun having no 11 year cycle occurred only once from the
>early 1500s to 1720.
Presumably, this event was the result of natural phenomena that constantly recur all around us and are easily measurable and verifiable.
You have missed the essence of my point Glen. I am not talking about unique events, since events are by their nature unique. I am talking about the constantly recurring phenomena underlying the unique events.
This was my point concering abiogenesis. If it is a normal physical phenomenon, we should find it in nature, or at least be able to produce it in the lab. And barring both these, we certainly should be able to have a compelling theory about it. None of this has happened.
>
>The formation of the microwave background happened exactly once at the end
>of the radiation era.
>
This is another unique event dependent on constantly recurring natural law.
>The evaporation of the Mediterranean and its transformation to a desert
>happened only once.
This is another unique event dependent on constantly recurring natural law.
>
>The rise of the Himalaya's happened only once. Indeed, we have absolutely
>no direct observational evidence of an orogeny--any of them.
>
[snip of repetitions]
>
>I am sure others can add to this list.
>
I hope you see my point now. I have no need to go through the rest of your examples.
>My advice is be consistent. Either accept that indirect phenomenological
>evidence can lead us to the correct view of origins or reject all noumena as
>unknowable and lapse into solipcism. One should be allowed to pick and
>chose his epistemological approach for various topics.
>
I don't really know what you mean by this last comment. I don't know what you mean by "indirect phenomenolical evidence". Perhaps you could elaborate in another thread.
Good talkning Glen. Thanks for the efforts,
Richard Amiel McGough
Discover the sevenfold symmetric perfection of the Holy Bible at http://www.BibleWheel.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jul 26 2003 - 13:31:14 EDT