>
> In his book **The Blind Watchmaker**, Richard Dawkins tries
>to explain that the improbable origin of life scenarios he has discussed
>are actually perfectly reasonable:
>
You may be pleased to learn that Dawkins has recently joined the
ranks of the creationists, at least according to Iris Fry:
ABSTRACT: This paper calls attention to a philosophical
presupposition, coined here "the continuity thesis" which
underlies and unites the different, often conflicting,
hypotheses in the origin of life field. This presupposition,
a necessary condition for any scientific investigation of
the origin of life problem, has two components. First, it
contends that there is no unbridgeable gap between inorganic
matter and life. Second, it regards the emergence of life
as a highly probable process. Examining several current
origin-of-life theories, I indicate the implicit or explicit
role played by the "continuity thesis" in each of them. In
addition, I identify the rivals of the "thesis" within the
scientific community - "the almost miracle camp." Though
adopting the anti-vitalistic aspect of the "continuity
thesis", this camp regards the emergence of life as
involving highly improbable events. Since it seems that
the chemistry of the prebiotic stages and of molecular
self-organization processes rules out the possibility that
life is the result of a "happy accident," I claim that the
"almost miracle" view implies in fact, a creationist position.
--Fry, I. (1995). "Are the Different Hypotheses on the Emergence
of Life as Different as they Seem?," <Biology and Philosophy>
10:389-417.
;-).
========================
Brian Harper |
Associate Professor | "It is not certain that all is uncertain,
Applied Mechanics | to the glory of skepticism" -- Pascal
Ohio State University |
========================