Randy
_____________________________________________________________________
| |
| ______ ______ _____ Randy Bronson, Manufacturing Tech |
| /\_____\/\_____\/\____\ TECH-SOURCE INC. |
| \/_ _/ / ____/\/_ _/ 442 S. North Lake Blvd. |
| / / // / /___ / / / Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 |
| / / /_\/___ /_/ / / TEL : 407-262-7100 |
| / / //\____/ /\_\/ /_\ FAX : 407-339-2554 |
| \/_/ \/_____/\/______/ EMAIL: randy@techsource.com |
| |
|_____________________________________________________________________|
On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, John E. Rylander wrote:
> Randy,
>
> I think the real responses are that (1) as you agree, numerous proteins
> could do that job of the one particularly mentioned, just as (a crude
> analogy) numerous hands of cards could win a particular game of poker, and
> (2) pretty much no one is saying such a protein would simply pop into
> existence, but rather evolutionary theorists generally believe that there
> were many evolutionary precursors to the current simplest forms of life
> around. (The precursors aren't around now because they were not as fit as
> their successors.)
>
> Abiogenesis is, of course, evolutionary theory's weakest link right now --
> it's very speculative, and there are no clearly winning theories.
> Nonetheless, pretty much no one believes the view Joseph puts forward and
> then critiques. Hence, he's putting forth -- over, and over, and over, and
> over again -- a straw man.
>
> If (1) and (2) were false (i.e., if this were the only relevant protein, and
> if it had to be purely randomly, not evolutionarily, assembled), I think
> Joseph would be right.
>
> But people have a hard time taking him seriously simply because (1) and (2)
> are true, so far as scientists know anyway.
>
> I think also his condescending eloquence, -combined with- his seemingly
> invincible -scientific- ignorance (I do NOT mean general stupidity or
> anything like that) brings them to lose patience with him. There's been a
> vicious circle of rhetorical degeneration on both sides, but the facts about
> evolutionary theory are on the side of Joseph's many critics.
>
> (My comments here aren't as precise as I'd like, but I'm in a hurry.)
>
> --John
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: evolution-owner@udomo2.calvin.edu
> > [mailto:evolution-owner@udomo2.calvin.edu]On Behalf Of Randy Bronson
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 6:24 AM
> > To: evolution@calvin.edu
> > Subject: Probability question
> >
> >
> >
> > As a layman with no scientific training I've been observing on the
> > list for several months. But I've been intrigued by the recent
> > discussion on probability and would like to pose a question.
> > Joseph's original contention was that abiogenesis was an event so
> > improbable that it could not have happened without intelligent
> > intervention. His viewpoint was argued against by noting that a
> > particular hand of cards dealt to a player or a particular roll of
> > the dice over ten trials were also seemingly improbable events which
> > happened nevertheless. But it seems to me that these examples deal
> > with a different type of situation than the one that Joseph originally
> > described.
> > In Joseph's situation a particular subset of all possible outcomes
> > was specified in advance. It was not denied that some amino acids
> > would form chains of varying lengths only that no functional proteins
> > would be form(and as Pim has correctly pointed out there is more that
> > one functional amino acid chain that could be formed). In the counter-
> > examples that were offered ANY dealt hand of cards or ANY roll of the
> > dice can be used as examples of an improbable event that actually
> > happens. To bring the idea of the wager back into the discussion,
> > would you bet ten thousand dollars that you would draw the same hand
> > after the deck is shuffled or that you could roll the dice in exactly
> > the same sequence again?
> > A process which could produce any one of a thousand outcomes only
> > produces one. That outcome does in fact occur but to specify it in
> > advance would be very difficult. It seems to me that this is the
> > sense in which Joseph's critique is valid.
> > Looking forward to your responses.
> >
> > Randy Bronson
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _____________________________________________________________________
> > | |
> > | ______ ______ _____ Randy Bronson, Manufacturing Tech |
> > | /\_____\/\_____\/\____\ TECH-SOURCE INC. |
> > | \/_ _/ / ____/\/_ _/ 442 S. North Lake Blvd. |
> > | / / // / /___ / / / Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 |
> > | / / /_\/___ /_/ / / TEL : 407-262-7100 |
> > | / / //\____/ /\_\/ /_\ FAX : 407-339-2554 |
> > | \/_/ \/_____/\/______/ EMAIL: randy@techsource.com |
> > | |
> > |_____________________________________________________________________|
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>