[Apologetics] Pope's commission on evolution

[Stephen Korsman]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stuart D. Gathman" <stuart at bmsi.com>
To: "Stephen Korsman" <skorsman at theotokos.co.za>
Cc: <apologetics at gathman.org>
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 6:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Apologetics] Pope's commission on evolution


> On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Stephen Korsman wrote:
>
> > That depends on how you interpret the word "unguided."  Science cannot
> > observe God, so it cannot comment on whether or not God guides a
process.
> > My understanding is that on a basic molecular level, there is no
mechanism
> > defined within the natural laws of physics that determines how mutations
> > occur.  (There is a mechanism that determines the likelihood of each
type of
> > mutation - in the genome, A is replaced by T more easily than by G or C
...
> > and there are factors that influence the rate of mutation.  And once a
> > mutation occurs, there are many factors that determine its viability.)
>
> You are talking about "special evolution" or "natural selection".
> There is no controversy on that subject - except where it is confused
> with general evolution.  Special evolution is even used in computer
> aided design.  Special evolution tweaks parameters of a pre-existing
> design to optimize its adaptation to a specific environment.
>
> The claim of general evolution is that chance + necessity produced
> the appearance of chosen complexity (i.e. design).

The scientists claiming general evolution are simply not in a position to
pontificate on whether or not there is an ultimate guide behind what they
see as chance.  So I see little problem there.  When they do pontificate on
that, they're outside their scientific bounds, and can safely be ignored.

> Mathematically,
> chance + necessity will only degrade existing chosen complexity and the
> odds of producing chosen complexity are astronomically high.  This is not
a
> problem for atheistic evolution because they don't believe the complexity
is
> actually chosen - it only seems to be so.  Furthermore, odds are
> irrelevant for atheistic evolution thanks to the anthropic principle.
> The odds may be astronomically high against, but only because
> the universe got lucky are we here to observe it.