From: David Morey (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Tue Oct 19 2004 - 19:07:22 BST
Hi Mark
But that's exactly an example of something
that appears to have been selected to survive
in certain conditions and is wiped by a change
in conditions, it is not a mutation that gets wiped
is it. I know I am annoying it is deliberate but that's
more evidence for my point not against it.
Look, selection is highly plausible as a causal
factor in evolution, crap forms get wipped, but that
supposes the endless creation of new forms some
of which are highly successful. This is very odd,
even if you had a lot of monkeys and typewriters
and could select all you like for the monkey that
gets closest to typing Shakespeare you just are not
going to get to Shakespeare. The cosmos is not that
old. How we did get from monkeys to Shakespear
is a hard one, evolution has surely happened, Darwinism
does help explain it, but I for one of many, think we
need other causal and perhaps agentive forces to make
an explanation. Sheldrake has suggested one way,
Lamarck another, we still await a breakthrough.
It seems obvious to me that the past is present in a
more direct way than via DNA. Perhaps quantum interconnectivity
hints at something else. DNA learns only negative lessons, surely
evolution requires something more positive. Prior to better
evidence I doubt the causal adequacy & sufficiency of Darwinism.
DM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Steven Heyman" <markheyman@infoproconsulting.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 12:34 AM
Subject: Re: MD On Faith - Improbability ?
> Hi David,
>
> On 17 Oct 2004 at 14:36, David Morey wrote:
>
>> msh says:
>> But isn't the fossil record loaded with examples of biological false
>> starts, goofy non-viable mutations, and dead ends? (I bet Jim can
>> provide plenty of examples.
>
> DM: As any scientist will tell you anything in the fossil record must
> have been pretty successful at hanging around and breeding for quite
> some time to fluke a turn up in the fossil record.
>
> msh says:
> I was thinking of certain species of foraminifera and diatoms which
> pooped out very quickly (geologically speaking), due to an inability
> to withstand even moderate variations in water temp and salinity:
> definitely a sign of non-existent or bad planning. But this is from
> memory of two Invertebrate Paleontology courses I took back in the
> 70's, which is why I framed my point as a question. But I'm pretty
> sure the guy who taught the course would qualify as a scientist.
>
> david advises me:
> get yourself up to date my friend and accept the limited status of
> our current knowledge and don't just repeat neo-Darwin fantasy as
> fact.
>
> msh says:
> Will do. Thanks for the advice.
>
> Best,
> Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
> --
> InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors
> Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983
> Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com
>
> "Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is
> everything." -- Henri Poincare'
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward -
> http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Oct 20 2004 - 03:49:56 BST