Re: WHY DOES THE UNIVERSE WORK?

From: DNAunion@aol.com
Date: Thu Oct 05 2000 - 22:28:08 EDT

Next message: DNAunion@aol.com: "Re: CSI, GAs, etc."

Previous message: DNAunion@aol.com: "Re: ID and Creationism"
Maybe in reply to: Bertvan@aol.com: "WHY DOES THE UNIVERSE WORK?"
Next in thread: FMAJ1019@aol.com: "Re: WHY DOES THE UNIVERSE WORK?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

>Richard Wein: I think it's unwise to place too much reliance on this paper
by Thornhill and Ussery. Their definition of irreducible complexity seems to
me to be
just as problematic as Behe's. I've yet to see any definition of IC which
defines the meaning of "parts" or "components" in an adequate way.

DNAunion: And I've yet to see an adequate and universally definition of
life, evolution, and species. So does that mean that these too do not exist?

Next message: DNAunion@aol.com: "Re: CSI, GAs, etc."
Previous message: DNAunion@aol.com: "Re: ID and Creationism"
Maybe in reply to: Bertvan@aol.com: "WHY DOES THE UNIVERSE WORK?"
Next in thread: FMAJ1019@aol.com: "Re: WHY DOES THE UNIVERSE WORK?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 05 2000 - 22:28:37 EDT