>How do we ever decide "reasonably high probability" in science? Let me
>approach it from the other direction. When do we decide inductively that so
>many systems obey a certain natural law, that the law is actually
>universal, and that it applies to as-yet-uninvestigated systems? Example:
>by the early part of this century, the law of the conservation of momentum
>seemed written in stone. But eventually certain nuclear phenomena led to
>the postulate that a "neutrino" existed. There was a real problem, because
>it seemed as if some momentum was lost. Some physicists actually toyed with
>the idea that perhaps the law of the conservation of momentum was not
>actually universal. But in the 1950s experimental evidence revealed the
>existence of the neutrino and, to make a long story short, there was no
>further worry about the validity of momentum conservation. So why can't we
>hold off a bit on the universality of the law of evolution in biological
>systems when there seem to be some anomalies? That is, why can't we adopt
>the tentative attitude some physicists had for a while concerning momentum
>conservation?
>
If this is all that Behe and company are saying, then fine. (My preference
would be to side with the reigning paradigm in the anticipation, as is
usually the case, even in the example that you cited, that the anomalies
will be solved.) BUT as I read Mike Behe and now several of his supporters
who have posted to this thread, much more is being said. The claim is that
the black box has been opened and we now KNOW that an evolutionary
explanation is NOT POSSIBLE. Please correct me if I am mis-reading Mike.
TG
_____________________________________________________________
Terry M. Gray, Ph.D. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry
Calvin College 3201 Burton SE Grand Rapids, MI 40546
Office: (616) 957-7187 FAX: (616) 957-6501
Email: grayt@calvin.edu http://www.calvin.edu/~grayt
*This mission critical message was written on a Macintosh with Eudora Pro*
A special message for Macintosh naysayers:
http://www.macworld.com/pages/july.96/Column.2204.html