Re: [asa] TE/EC Response - ideology according to Terry

I guess we figure out the easy things first.]

;-)

TG

On Jul 20, 2009, at 10:57 AM, George Murphy wrote:

>
>
> I agree that present evolutionary theory isn't on a par with general
> relativity - if one remembers that Einstein's theory covers all the
> successes of Newton's as well as departures from it. But I don't
> think this invalidates my point about the need for theorizing about
> what makes evolution work - if in fact it's happened, & I think it
> has.
>
> Shalom
> George
> http://home.roadrunner.com/~scitheologyglm
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexanian, Moorad" <alexanian@uncw.edu
> >
> To: "George Murphy" <GMURPHY10@neo.rr.com>; "Bill Powers" <wjp@swcp.com
> >; "Cameron Wybrow" <wybrowc@sympatico.ca>
> Cc: "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 11:26 AM
> Subject: RE: [asa] TE/EC Response - ideology according to Terry
>
>
> Hi George,
>
> From one theorist to another, I would never place the present
> understanding of evolution on an equal footing with our
> understanding of gravitation. For one, we can make all sorts of
> predictions in our theory of gravitation and test them
> experimentally, witness Apollo 11, whereas the same cannot be said
> of evolution.
> I know that if I assume that the physical is all that there is, then
> evolutions must be true. However, the converse is not true and
> therein lies all the discussions and disagreements.
>
> Moorad
> ________________________________________
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
> Behalf Of George Murphy [GMURPHY10@neo.rr.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 10:56 AM
> To: Bill Powers; Cameron Wybrow
> Cc: ASA
> Subject: Re: [asa] TE/EC Response - ideology according to Terry
>
> I want to comment just on the piece of Bill's post that I snip below.
>
> Of course we can believe, & have strong evidence for believing, that
> evolution has happened & is happening without knowing what makes it
> work.
> In the same way, one can regard Newton's law of universal
> gravitation simply
> as a well supported empirical rule with no attempt to understand why
> it's
> true. That is what Newton meant when he said "I do not make
> hypotheses,"
> not theorizing in general. He was not adverse to all hypotheses.
>
> But scientists are not satisfied with such positions. Some may
> argue that
> they should be but they generally aren't. They look for reasons why
> things
> behave in one way & not another. & when we find that our empirical
> rules
> run into probleems - when we realize that Newton's laws don't account
> precisely for details of orbital mechanics or if we start wondering
> why the
> coelecanth is still around - we're going to look for theories that
> will (a)
> broaden our original empirical rules & (b) at the same time tell us
> why
> those rules are approximately true.
>
> (The coelecanth example is perhaps a poor one. The YEC notion that
> its
> survival challenges evolution is of course nonsense. But it is
> natural to
> wonder why some species survive for a long time & others don't. &
> one of
> the deficiencies of merely saying "evolution happens" is that we
> have no way
> of getting at such questions.)
>
> Shalom
> George - unapologetic theorist
> http://home.roadrunner.com/~scitheologyglm
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bill Powers" <wjp@swcp.com>
> To: "Cameron Wybrow" <wybrowc@sympatico.ca>
> Cc: "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 9:19 AM
> Subject: Re: [asa] TE/EC Response - ideology according to Terry
>
>
>> Cameron:
> ...........................
>> Now you come and say that Darwinian evolution is "weak" science. You
>> never doubt, it seems, that evolution has taken place. You simply
>> question the means.
>>
>> One needs to ask what is the significance of questioning the means.
>> When
>> Newton proposed his theory of gravity, he refused to posit an
>> opinion as
>> to how gravity acted, taking such an effort to be a remnant of
>> Aristotleian physics. Most of the questions that the Aristotelians
>> asked
>> of him and other science are still unanswered and science has
>> "progressed"
>> nonetheless.
>>
>> Naively I ask, to what extent does evolutionary science depend upon
>> the
>> specific means of biological evolution? Chromosome fusion and the
>> like
>> appear equally consistent with chance, lawfulness, and intelligence.
> ...........................
>
>
> 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.

________________
Terry M. Gray, Ph.D.
Computer Support Scientist
Chemistry Department
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523
(o) 970-491-7003 (f) 970-491-1801

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Jul 20 17:53:18 2009