Re: [asa] Random and natural vs intelligence

I am not in the business of defending Collins, yet I am surely
interested in determining what Collins said. I am listening to him
right now. Evolution provided the room, but it is not sufficient to
explain moral law, desire to find God, etc.

Why is it not ok for Collins to admit ignorance though?

No single pair of ancestors but a group of 10,000 people, how to
interpret the story of Adam and Eve which conflicts with the genetic
data?

Adam and Eve:

Commenter: Out of africa idea with Mitochondial eve and Y chromosomal
Adam. Sounds all very tempting to conclude a single pair of
individuals gave birth to humanity.

Collins; These ideas have been over interpreted, no single individual.
DNA beyond these two, two single ancestors won't work.

Commenter: If the evidence does not lead to such a conclusion, does it
allow for such a conclusion?

Collins: It does exclude it based on genetic evidence. Four copies are
not sufficient to explain the variability of certain genes. It does
not rock my faith that Adam and Eve were not historical figures.

Pim: Seems to me that Collins excludes a single historical pair of
humans based on his scientific understanding of the genetics involved.
-------------------
Break

Funny how the commercial talks about "Who was Adam" to suggest that
RTB is fighting the charge against Darwinism to show a historical
Adam.

End Break
-------------------

Dave: Enjoyed reading the book. Intelligent Design movement, could you
please share your viewpoints

Collins: Sure, I believe in id in the sense that God created, with a
small i and a small d, more recently we have seen ID, which is an
interpretation that is interesting but likely to be incorrect due to
scientific discoveries. Not a good place for believers to rest their
faith. Behe, Johnson, Dembski: There are certain components of living
cells that are so complex that evolution could not have generated them
in the time given. Bacterial flagellum: Many proteins to come together
until all were together, improbable... On surface it sounds like a
compelling argument. Cracks in arguments, we increasingly recognize
that IC systems are built by recruiting existing proteins step by
step. In case of flagellum, the science shows that this is indeed
plausible. ID is not a place for believers to place a lot of
confidence, God of the gap theories. Unknowable confused with unknown,
history has shown us to be careful not to go there.

Fuz: How do you understand God's involvement. TE is a spectrum of use
from Deistic to TE with close and intimate involvement. Is God
controlling evolutionary process.

Collins: Not Deistic, moral law, etc are all evidences that God is
interested in human individuals. I don't know how God accomplished all
this, most consistent with God outside of space and time, to instill
the gifts to universe at the origin of the Universe which would lead
to human. No need to postulate to a fix-it God, who has to step in.
God could have been aware of the outcome, right to this conversation
today. While it boggles our mind, an all powerful God could do this

Faz: Any reason to be skeptical

Collins: Biological evolution has not explained all, origin of life
for instance. All theories, about RNA world do not come close enough
yet. I do not want to put my faith in this interval either. Finding a
reasonable explanation for origin of life will not shake Collins'
faith. Gap in evolution is in explaining humanity such as morality,
not explainable by selection. That does not seem to me that science
will be able to explain.

Collins: I realize that this may be a gap argument itself, Collins
insists that science is not in a position to answer what came before
the universe started, or the fine tuning (anthropic principle), sure
there is an alternative explanation (multiverse theory) and we can
only exist where we exist, requires more faith than believing in God.
Valid argument, but not proof of God's existence.
Evolutionary psychologists argue about kin selection as explanations
for morality, reciprocal altruism, but that does not work for
Collins.Good and evil is not absolute when a by product of evolution,
no right or wrong. Not arbitrary concepts, points to God.

----
Pim: I agree, that Collins arguing against gaps and then accepting and
insisting on gaps, is a weak argument.
----
Faz: Objection against ID is that it lacks a model that allows one to
make predictions, does this ring a bell with you? And follow-on, if
they would come up with a model, would ID be more likely a scientific
hypothesis
Collins: ID would have to make predictions to make it a scientific
theory. Such requirements need not apply when it is a theological
theory. It has been very difficult that would allow experimental
details to detect supernatural intervention, since science is
powerless to analyze the supernatural. Will be a major challenge.
Break
--------------
35 minutes into the 2 hour episode, need to take a break. So far I
have yet to hear Faz raise significant objections about 'random
evolution' and Collins' position.
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.