>This just in: A small life form actually stuck its head out of the meteor and
>said, "Take me to your leader." So they transported it to Hillary Clinton's
>office.
Poor Martian life form. Next week it'll be blamed for hiring Craig Livingstone.
>
>[Pause for laughs]
>
>Now then. Let's say it IS a life form. This, it seems to me, vindicates both
>Francis Crick [directed panspermia] and Fred Hoyle [Evolution from Space]. It
>deals a blow to traditional evolutionists (what, we had spontaneous generation
>in TWO places in the solar system?) and does nothing to harm Intelligent
>Design. In fact, it rather supports the idea.
This illustrates a misconception that seems fairly common among creationists,
Based on calculations which make a whole series of assumptions that are
difficult to establish, various people, some of them evolutionists, have
estimated that the probability of abiogenesis is some small number like
10^(-300). _If_ life originated on earth and Mars by abiogenesis, we have
two examples of an event whose probability is infinitesimal. There are
several possibilities:
1. The probabilities are correct but abiogenesis happened twice anyway.
Highly improbable events do happen, and there are statistical tests one
might use to determine whether the number of occurrences observed of an
event deemed highly improbable is believable. Unfortunately, I don't
believe we have sufficient data to apply these tests.
2. The probabilities are incorrect because of phenonema unaccounted for in
the model. This would seem a reasonable avenue to pursue. The probability
models used strike me as grossly oversimplified, and do not account for
factors such as the possibility of multiple solutions for some of the
problems that need to be solved to achieve abiogenesis, as Glenn has
pointed out.
3. The probabilities are correct, but divine intervention has occurred.
As a Christian I'm quite comfortable with this. However, if I come to this
conclusion, it seems to represent a roadblock for further progress. I
grant that if I say, "God did it, but by studying the evidence perhaps I
can learn more about _how_ he did it," then it's not a roadblock. But if
further studies reveal many additional layers of cause and effect below the
point where I said "God did it," I would think the resulting uncertainty
about what is going on in a process that had once been labelled divine
intervention would have adverse effects on some Christians' faith. But no
matter how many layers of cause and effect I unearth, I haven't disproved
divine intervention. God did(and does) it all. We're just arguing about
His methods.
It seems to me that most creationists take position 3: assume the
probabality models are correct and conclude divine intervention. Their
reluctance to consider other possibilities looks to me like an example of
what I worried about in position 3 above: that they will want scientific
investigation to halt at points that have been designated points of divine
intervention, based on a level of knowledge that may later be superseded.
>
>What would, assuming once again, it say about God, man and Earth? I don't
>think much. Man would still be a special creation.
Of course. Gen 1:26 and 2:7 make that pretty clear.
>
>It does give us writers some good SF ideas, though. It's time to re-read the
>Hitchhiker trilogy again....
>
>...42....
>
Good suggestion. _After_ I finish my database of all the characters Tom
Clancy introduces in his books. I've done "Debt of honor," and now I'm
working on "Red storm rising." (Gotta get "The hunt for Red October" from
the library)
BTW there are now at least 4 books in the Hitchhiker Trilogy. Adams made
some crack about how trilogies grow in "Mostly Harmless" I believe. "There
is a theory that if anyone ever discovered what the universe is for, it
would immediatly disappear and be replaced by something more absurd" -
Douglass Adams (approximate quote from long-term memory)
Bill Hamilton | Chassis & Vehicle Systems
GM R&D Center | Warren, MI 48090-9055
810 986 1474 (voice) | 810 986 3003 (FAX)
hamilton@gmr.com (office) | whamilto@mich.com (home)