see my web page
http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/nonlin.htm
glenn
Hi Glenn,
I read your web pages. They are impressive, although much of the computer
stuff was too technical for me. First, I want to emphasize that I don't
regard any belief as dangerous, but strongly oppose attempts to suppress
ideas--any ideas. I have been indignant about the tactics used to discredit
anyone who questioned "random mutation and natural selection", but I should
have realized both sides of any controversy can be equally capable of
intolerance. Not being a Christian, I haven't talked to many "young earth
creationists". I admire your independence of thought, and am glad of such
diversity of belief among Christians. My problem is not necessarily with
evolution, but with the specific mechanism of "random mutation and natural
selection" as an explanation of macro evolution. Because of the irrational
passion with which many biologists defend the theory, I have become skeptical
of biologists. (I have no particular skepticism of science in general, or
geologists, or the accepted age of the earth.) I would be grateful if you
could answer some questions to help me understand your philosophy and beliefs.
Do you believe the laws of nature were designed--or came into existence by
accident? If you believe the laws of nature were designed by God, do you
believe he did so for any purpose? Do you believe the universe is the
result of accidental processes? The result of random, chance events? If
everything is the result of chance, what part, if any, could God have played?
I don't know enough about computers to understand most of your theories, but
I do realize computer do not pop into existence by chance: they are designed
by intelligent humans. . Do you have any objection to the concept of design?
Most advocates of "random mutation and natural selection" believe such
things as altruism, love and emotions are also the result of "random mutation
and natural selection". Is that part of your belief? I admit that
evolution is probably the result of mutations, but why do you insist they
must be random? And if mutations aren't random, but occur according to some
rational plan or design, natural selection wouldn't necessarily be important
to the process--except to eliminate mistakes, would it? Natural selection
would not be a creative force in that case, but merely a force for stasis,
wouldn't it? As a Christian, you must surely believe free will plays a part
in the evolution of human thought and culture. Do you eliminate will as
playing any part in biological evolution? Isn't symbiosis a collection of
individual events involving will? Do you rule out any form of
Lamarckism--mutations influenced by use? Do you think biologists' insistence
on randomness might have kept anyone from even investigating an environmental
component of mutation?
Respectfully, Bertvan