>
>
>
> >>> Pim van Meurs <pimvanmeurs@yahoo.com> 01/11/06 12:48 PM >>>asks me:
>
> Two questions 1) what are the persistent explanatory problems in
> evolutioanry theory such as the fossil record? and 2) why is the origin
> of life relevant to evolutionary theory?
.........
> (2) I don't know, Pim, why is the origin of life so often talked about--in
> terms of Miller's experiments and the like--in biology texts? Darwin of
> course begged off on this question, quite wisely, but many scienitsts don't
> beg off, they believe that chemical evolution of some sort took place. And
> they often believe this for a priori reasons that amount IMO to religious
> convictions. Oparin was a lovely example of this very point, about which he
> was quite explicit.
It's always seemed to me quite artificial for evolutionary scientists to bracket off the origin of life & say "That's not our problem." It is a problem that serious scientific investigation of the world has to deal with. Precisely whose professional area it belongs to -
paleontologists, chemists or whatever - is a relatively minor point.
The very fact that a lot of scientists have - as Ted notes - been working on for a long time is an indication of its importance. & again, whether or not those scientists consider themselves to be studying "biological evolution" makes little difference.
& it's a difficult problem. But having said all that, there is no theological reason at all to think that the origin of living things had to be more "miraculous" than the origin of anything else. As I've often pointed out (& several of the Fathers before me), it's precisely of living things that Genesis 1 speaks of mediated creation.
Shalom
George
(Following Ted's admonistion & making his last post of the day.)
Received on Wed Jan 11 16:24:23 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jan 11 2006 - 16:24:23 EST