RE: Are there things that don't evolve?

Thank you for all your responses. Wayne, I like your comments about 'why do
things evolve upward?'. In the same thought process as 'The Clockmaker'
argument, it seems totally illogical that they do - unless there is a
'Programmer'. I learned at some point how complex DNA is, and I have tried
to operate certain non-intuitive electronic devices by mathematically trying
all combinations which could conceivably work. I also have studied
combinatorics and statistics. It just doesn't make sense to me that things
evolve upward unless God is directing things.

A fundamentalist, Bible thumping Christian, who is also a biologist (is that
a word?) assured me that he has seen upward evolution in slugs and frogs. I
believe it.

But, I do not believe it can be undirected.

I could accept downward diversification with the natural selection of traits
in beings that were less advanced than the master parent race. But,
statistically, how can anyone justify greater complication? If it were a
theory which had not been seen evidentially - wouldn't you all reject it as
being improbable to the point of being ridiculous?

Debbie Mann
(765) 477-1776

  -----Original Message-----
  From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
Behalf Of Dawsonzhu@aol.com
  Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 12:27 PM
  To: deborahjmann@insightbb.com; asa@lists.calvin.edu
  Subject: Re: [SPAM]RE: Are there things that don't evolve?

  Deborah Mann wrote:

    'Descent'? Doesn't evolve' indicate 'ascent'? Evolution bothers me
    theoretically because it defies the law of entropy. Change by
simplification
    wouldn't bother me - but change by complication does. I'd love it if
your
    definitiion was the only 'evolution' there was.

  One thing is that you're confusing the meaning of descent (expressed
  as a direction), and descent (expressed as ancestry), as already pointed
  out. But I also see that you are conflating evolution with upward
direction
  in progress. Although it just so happens to be the case that life on
earth
  appears to have progressed from a possibly simple RNA world to a world
  of cells, and from a world of cells to something as complex as a human
  with a mind and ability to know God and worship Him, there is nothing
  in evolution itself that implies any direction is actually to be expected.

  Evolution simply moves from where it is. There actually is little
  reason why the complexity should increase except that during the process
  of natural selection here on earth, somehow, this situation was dominantly
  favored. Hence, first we see this increase in complexity over time, and
we
  infer that the direction is upward, but there is nothing within evolution
and
  the process of natural selection that says that it must be so.

  In addition, the process of natural selection involves a very complex
system
  dependent on a multitude of factors including the conditions in the
earth's
  environment, the competition between different organisms, and even
  competition within the species.

  So the notion that some scientists seem
  to express that intelligent life is somehow inevitable, is really a faith
statement,
  and so far at least, SETI is listening, but we haven't heard anything.
And that
  alone should raise serious doubts about that claim; although I will stress
here
  that even if we do hear something genuine over the cosmic airwaves,
whereas
  it will force us to modify our theology, it does not change the message of
the
  gospel. That Jesus came here only reflects how much more we were in need
  of salvation and Grace, not that we were somehow the most special. At any
  rate, your feeling that things should not naturally progress higher and
higher
  is correct in that respect.

  Since we do not know the reason, as a scientist, I would first look for
  some way to discover the mechanism that drives this progression.
  Natural selection certainly is part of it. Within our social system, we
  select out the "best and the brightest" to end up in the high places.
  But, a question to think about, is that enough to make progress?
  Similarly, in the contest for food, the strongest animals would probably
  win out, although here the word "strong" takes on different meanings
  depending on what is most likely to perpetuate the organisms as a
  whole.

  Up to here, I've said little about God or why we should care about
  salvation, and I think this is why we find ourselves so often in conflict
  with people who are not familiar with science, so just bear with me for
  a little longer.

  My job as a scientist is to look for ways to explain how a system
  changes due to the manipulation of some parameters. Because
  of the extreme complexity, as far as I know, we still don't have
  a good explanation for why the direction appears to always be up.
  To suggest that part, I've mainly pointed out words like competition,
  natural selection, etc. These are certainly factors that can
  encourage some direction. But one would still have to ask why
  it didn't stop with real survivors like ants, roaches and other
  organisms that many of us loath. I think it is difficult at that point
  at least to know exactly why, but, though it is very tempting to
  suggest that maybe there is this God (speaking now as a Christian),
  as a scientist, I cannot ask God to perform tricks for me like a
  mouse in a cage, I must work with the tools I have. Should I make
  progress in my understanding, using these tools, I am obliged to
  report it. But the issue of how God is working in this process is
  something I would ask myself. Maybe the universe is all "front loaded"
  with a tendency toward greater complexity. At any rate, you should
  recognize that any claims about us evolving further into some superior
  and far advanced organism (of course obviously more moral -- with
  sneering sarcasm on the "of course"), are all nonscientific claims
  as far as I know. We have no proof that it should go that way, all
  we know is that for some strange reason, the complexity of the
  organisms has, up to now at least. Further, the moral progression,
  though we do see this I think in the historical progression of
  scripture and working from the old testament to the new testament.
  Our moral understanding is dependent on God coming to us, not
  our discovery. Without God, we are nothing.

  Now, the issue with God saying the creation is good. We may punish
  a dog for doing something we don't approve of, and the dog will know
  that we will punish it, should it repeat that offense. But if a dog kills
  a human being for example, we do not say the dog was unethical, do
  we? The dog doesn't know God, the dog only know you. You can know
  God, so you have a duty to God to be moral, but the dog does not;
  though I think ones Godly character should even shine through and be
  brightly reflected from the behavior of the animals you care for. Now
  then again, cats? well aha. .... let's go on. (just kidding) So I don't
see
  the issue of natural selection there reflecting evil or something like
  that as some people try to read into evolution because there is
  death and all that.

  Moreover, that we share a common ancestry with other organisms
  does not mean that we should play by the rules of evolution or
  any of the animals we observe. We can know God, and therefore we
  have obligation to be moral. Though morality often coincides with
  results we can see from evolution, it is not at all a one to one
  correspondence. Evolution cannot teach us follow Christ, and even
  staunch atheists like Dawkins recognize that you must teach altruism.
  Whereas there are some instances of it in nature we can explain, Jesus
  dying on the cross for our sins is "a stumbling block to the Jews and
  foolishness to the Gentiles." It was the same then when Paul wrote
  that, and it is the same now. We are asked to have faith that this is
  what God wants. We know that in the world, evil men get away with
  many things unpunished and the righteous are sometimes cruelly
  oppressed. But we must go on in faith trusting that God is in control,
  even when we really find ourselves wondering.

  So at the heart of your original question, that sense of direction of
  evolution is some consequence of the way this universe is, but why
  it is, is not in the domain of science. That God planned it that way
  is what we Christians believe, but because we cannot measure God,
  we have to accept this as a matter of faith.

  By Grace alone we proceed,
  Wayne
Received on Sat Mar 25 18:45:15 2006