Re: [asa] Origins: Francis Collins and ID

 Hey, Bernie,

 evolution isn't really
trying to get anywhere, it simply keeps what it likes and throws away
bad things, correct?

 You say evolution isn't really trying to get anywhere, but then you say it is keeping what it "likes" and throwing away the "bad."? Isn't keeping what it likes and throwing away the bad the same as evolution trying to "get somewhere"?? I say it is all about trying to get somewhere.? To me, evolution is our creation by the hand of God and that hand is reflected in your words "keeps what it likes" and "throws away bad things."? But that's just natural selection.? We're now into extra-natural selection.?

As humans evolved by adhering to our instincts (our original faith or fealty to the demands of Creation) we were eventually blessed with an ever greater portion of the image of God by the emergence of reason.? At that point we are required not just to be faithful to the demands of Creation for our survival, but we had to be faithful to our emerging instinct for the Creator, as well.? Of course we screwed it up (the Fall) and now we're hard at destroying ourselves from too much highly evolved reason (high tech weapons) and not enough highly evolved instinct (faith and love).? It's no stretch to say that our survival hinges on faith in God and the teachings for us to love and to forgive each other, or otherwise wind up in the paleontology books of a more mutually enamored, naturally faithful species.? Extra-natural (willful) selection of faith-based behavior is the survival trait de jour for modern humans ? To me, evolution (survival) is all about God, these days.?

-Mike (Friend of ASA)
  

-----Original Message-----
From: Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
To: asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 2:18 pm
Subject: RE: [asa] Origins: Francis Collins and ID

George Cooper,

I see one difference. I was kind of thinking of the eye, and how to get
there. Your analogy goes the other way... start with building blocks
and see what you get after a bunch of trials... evolution isn't really
trying to get anywhere, it simply keeps what it likes and throws away
bad things, correct? The eye is the result (or ear, brain, etc.).
However, which your analogy of throwing software subroutines together,
seems like given enough time it could create something wonderful, but
most likely it would just create reams of crap... kind of like the
monkeys typing for infinity, trying to match Shakespeare... I just can't
grasp it, but maybe that's my fault.

Still, by studying the complexity of the eye as an engineering marvel,
it baffles the mind how evolution can make that... baffles my mind,
anyway.

David Campbell, I read your response, but all the evidence for evolution
of an eye would also fit the framework of God directing evolution, too.
Would you have objection to God-guided evolution (God personally
manipulating DNA), and if so, why? Simply because it must be a
naturalistic explanation to be science (God is not allowed)? If God
isn't allowed in personally fiddling with the DNA, is that more of a
Deistic Evolutionist stance than Theistic Evolution?

...Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of George Cooper
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 3:04 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Origins: Francis Collins and ID

Hi Bernie,

You might like to know that what David has stated was somewhat known at
the
time of Darwin, who argued against Paley's claim that "the eye was a
sure
cure for atheism". Rudimentary eyes were known in the 19th century, and

today we see this more clearly. [I'm tyring to improve my puns, but
having
little sucess.]

David said: "We manage with a lot fewer colors than some birds."
Indeed, they posses four color cones to our three. Further, the
responsiveness for each of the bird's cones do not overlap the spectral
range of the other cones, at least not the few graphs I've seen. Our
color
cones overalap which complicates color determination. Perhaps our
brains do
a better job than the birds at coloration, but I do not know if this has

been established. Regardless the birds have the advantage.

Whitetail deer only have two color cones, but one cone gives them the
ability to see some UV, violet, and faint blue better than we can.
[Keep
this in mind when sneaking into a deer blind before sunrise; they are
probably watching us all the way up.] Their larger aperature also gives

them greater ability to see in dimmer light than we can.

Assuming you are experienced in programing, there is likely a very good
analogy that will help you understand evolution's developmental
strength. I
doubt this attempt will be all the good, but allow me to try....

Imagine starting with a 10 line algorithym that had some functional
ability.
Combine this with a thousand other small algorithyms and if any
combination
has improved functional use, then keep it. Let the larger, combined ones

attach to both larger and smaller ones. If any of these have a
functional
use, keep them. Allow variations in each line of code so that they get
tried and tested, too. How large of a program can come from this
process
that builds upon itself?

The important element is what determines if a program has "functional
use".
Life is the name for that program and natural selection, with branching,
is
the descriptive process.

Hopefully, you or another can offer a superior analogy, but I hope you
see
the power from building up from a low form to a higher form. This
process
comes at a price as there is much failure and energy is required at
every
point along the way. Fortunately, the white Sun does a nice job of
providing most of the energy needed. [Radioactivity is the energy
source
for some deep, oceanic organisms.]

GeorgeA

>
> --
> Dr. David Campbell
> 425 Scientific Collections
> University of Alabama
> "I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/text.htm?ncid=aolcmp00050000000003

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Dec 4 20:42:57 2007