In a message dated 8/16/08 3:02:49 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Robert Riefer writes:
"The confusion, aggravation, and cost of modern day nomenclature is the result of being based upon an outdated, early 19th century hypothesis with an admitted probability of 10 to the negative 37th power or 1/10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance of occurence. Such an archane and absurd idea would have been laid to rest in museums and repeats of "Antiques Roadshow" if it were not the state sponsored religion in the United States: taught in the public school system as early as kindergarten. Its name is The Theory of Evolution." With all due respect, your statement on the absurd probability of species diversity being the result of evolution is based on a misunderstanding of both probabilities, and biological processes. Reactions and changes within biological (and inorganic chemical)systems are not random in any sense, nor driven by probability. And these biological systems are not closed systems, and so are not simply driven by the laws of thermodynamics as the proponents of superstition like to believe. Were the theory so "arcane and absurd", it would not have the power to make the predictions and drive the research that it has in so many of the sub fields of biological science. Clearly more absurd and arcane are the conjectures of "special creation" (especially the "young earth" version), and "intelligent design". They have neither the power to make experimentally verifiable predictions, not to explain complex observations. Acceptance of both in fact requires basic changes in the rules of science, and a negation of naturalism. Both assume that the current lack of ability to explain certain phenomena is the result, not of current lack of knowledge or evidence, but the result of the phenomena being beyond human understanding (the result of supernatural intervention). Both also require the rejection of much physics and geology and the acceptance of scenarios with no factual base (field observation or experimental results). At base both creationism and intelligent design also require one to accept the scriptures of three specific religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam) as "true", and the scriptures of all others as necessarily "false". Though, to be honest, "intelligent design" also allows one to believe that god-like space aliens are responsible for species diversity, but asks for no empirical proof. What can be said about the confusion of modern day nomenclature is that it is in serious flux as a result of new experimental tools whose efficacy and proper use is still being figured out. And that perhaps the basic concepts of Genus, Species and Family need to be examined, as well as the criteria for defining them in plants. The Theory of Evolution is about as strong as a theory can get, and those who deny it would probably also go for the theory of spontaneous generation so popular back in the 16th century, and the theory of the earth-centric universe, so clearly explained and supported by Genesis! **************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos. (http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00030000000007 ) _______________________________________________ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
