> I see the argument as more of a "transcendental argument" which I
>take as different, and more potentially cogent, than a mere analogical
>argument. A transcendental argument begins with given states (e.g. data)
>and asks what would be NECESSARY in order for these states to be as they
>are? Pure chance and mutational selection are judged as insufficient
>explanations. What are the other options? Maybe something else is possible
>beside intelligent design, but intelligent design is offered as an
>hypothesis which posits the necessary condition for the existence of known
>states of affairs (e.g. specified complexity). It seems to me that this
>approach cannot be summarily dismissed because it is just an analogy.
I am somewhat amazed that the new science of nonlinear dynamics has had such
a difficult time penetrating Christian thought. I have a program on my web
page which can be downloaded and run on a pc. This is based upon based upon
a genome of 384 bits.. These numbers are then used as the genome in the
production of a screen shape. Each iteration of the program mutates the
genome, and then a screen "critter" is made. If you run the selection
program and search for a genome that produces a given shape you will find
that shape. If you use classical, creationist definitions of probability
there is only 1 chance out of 10^115 (2^384) that the correct genome will
be found. It would take longer than the age of the universe to find the one
and only genome. However, what we find is that after about 2600 mutations,
I find a genome which will produce any desired shape. If I re-run the
program, I will find another genome which produces that very same shape. In
fact, I have not had the occasion to settle on the same genome twice. This
means that somewhere around 10^105 or so genomes of my artificial creature
will produce that shape.
This is what complexity theorists believe is happening with biological
systems. As Brian pointed oit, Yockey caclulated that there are 10^95
different cytochrome c's whcih have the same specificity.
So, how can chance be "judged as insufficient?"
Random searches for molecules of a particular function by manufacturing
randomly generated sequences finds lots of molecules that fit the same
bill. See Gerald Joyce, "Directed Evolution "Scientific America, Dec. 1992,
p. 94-95.
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm