>Saw Dawkins on TV last night.
I hope this interview gets shown in the US. I am a consummate nonTV
watcher -- to the point that I almost instinctively leave the living rom if
I'm there and another family member turns the contraption on. So if any of
you happen to see it scheduled for some national program like Nova, please
post that fact. Thanks
>Dawkins claims their is no design and the universe is purposeless.
>When questioned why Paul Davies a physicist finds the evidence
>for design overwhelming, Dawkins claimed: 1. I am a biologist, so
>I can't judge physics; and 2. Physics has not yet had its Darwin to
>come along and show it the right way.
In statement 2 he is judging physics -- contradicting his statement 1.
Note that there is a difference between claiming that design is difficult
to rigorously nail down (my claim) and the claim that there is no design.
The first is simply a reasonable conclusion from experience. The second is
a metaphysical leap.
>
>An interesting thing is that Dawkins admitted that evolution could
>not predict anything. Dawkins refused to predict what the human
>race was going to evolve into in the next million years.
I'd be very interested in exactly what was said in this exchange. Saying
that evolution cannot predict what man will be like in a million years is
quite reasonable. That's not the sort of prediction we are talking about
when we talk about the predictive power of theories. (Besides, I really
doubt the Lord will tarry another million years, so why bother? :-)) But
if he said evolution has no predictive power at all -- meaning that it
cannot suggest further investiagations and experiments, then I'd say that
was news.
>
>Dawkins seemed very sincere, but as Billy Graham used to say,
>people can be "sincerely *wrong*".
>
Agreed
Bill Hamilton | Vehicle Systems Research
GM R&D Center | Warren, MI 48090-9055
810 986 1474 (voice) | 810 986 3003 (FAX)