The designer was randomly designed? I'm outa here ;-) Tim Typo Mostly Harmless
----- Original Message ----- From: "AlunFoto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <pdml@pdml.net> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 12:50 PM Subject: Re: Global warming was: The Nine-spotted > The "intelligent design" hypothesis has repeatedly tried to hold up > examples of irreducible complexity as signatures of a sentient, and > necessarily divine creator. > > One thing they repeatedly fail to take into consideration is that the > precursors of the traits they look at may have evolved for other > purposes than the present. The bacterium flagella held up by Michael > Behe is afaik the latest example of just that. In many organisms, > however, one finds the molecular components that make up the flagella > applied for other purposes, and the combination of the components > isn't as big a step up as Behe argues. > > Another thing they don't consider is that an organ can have an > evolutionary advantage in simpler forms than the present. The > mammalian eye used to be a favourite example; that if you took away > any of the parts of the eye it wouldn't work, and ipso facto it must > have been created, not evolved. Not so, because even the most > primitive photoreceptors would give an advantage to those who posessed > them over those who didn't. In addition, there is the fact that there > are many different eye constructions out there, all quite advanced in > today's organisms. The insect/arthropod eye with all its facets, the > vertebrate eyes (quite different between fish and say, whales, but > still sharing many anatomical features). Arguably, the most advanced > eye belongs not to a vertrabrate, but to an octopus. For example, the > octopus eye does not have a blind spot like all vertebrate eyes have. > > Ultimately, the concept of a designer also begs the question of who > designed the designer. > > Jostein > > > > Michael Behe is another die-hard in that camp, but > 2007/6/14, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> Noted British Astonomer Fred Hoyle wrote (note I'm using this as an >> example >> of a noted and respected scientist, not that I agree with everything he >> says >> or that he's always correct... who is?) >> >> "if one proceeds directly and straightforwardly in this matter, without >> being deflected by a fear of incurring the wrath of scientific opinion, >> one >> arrives at the conclusion that biomaterials with their amazing measure or >> order must be the outcome of intelligent design." >> >> Hoyle calculated that the chance of obtaining the required set of enzymes >> for even the simplest living cell was one in 10 *40,000 power. Since the >> number of atoms in the known universe is infinitesimally tiny by >> comparison >> (10 *80 power), he argued that even a whole universe full of primordial >> soup >> wouldn't have a chance. He claimed: The notion that not only the >> biopolymer >> but the operating program of a living cell could be arrived at by chance >> in >> a primordial organic soup here on the Earth is evidently nonsense of a >> high >> order. >> >> Hoyle compared the random emergence of even the simplest cell to the >> likelihood that "a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a >> Boeing 747 from the materials therein." Hoyle also compared the chance of >> obtaining even a single functioning protein by chance combination of >> amino >> acids to a solar system full of blind men solving Rubik's Cube >> simultaneously. >> >> >> >> Tom C. >> >> >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> > > > -- > http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ > http://alunfoto.blogspot.com > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.15/848 - Release Date: 13.06.2007 > 12:50 > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
