Sunday, May 14

Life

The Commissar Wades Into Battle, Fit The Seven Thousand Three Hundred And Ninety-Seventh, Or Thereabouts

His response here; the original post here, on a blog called The Brutality of Reason. My comment follows:

So we want to teach something that we cannot possibly scientifically support as the origin of mankind, but toss out the cultural and religious experience that has made Western Culture what it is.

No.

Any further questions?

Look, I don't like ignorance and liberal hypocrisy any more than you do, but I don't like ignorance and conservative hypocrisy either. And you are arguing here from a position of near total ignorance of the subject. For example, you ask:

Was the first single cell organism an animal or plant?

And the answer, again, is no.

These are just the questions that come off the top of my head.

That's the problem. The questions you ask about evolution have already been answered in painstaking detail. The questions you ask about abiogenesis - how the first life forms (which were much simpler than single cells) came into existence - have been answered too, but rather more speculatively, since we don't know for sure.

I note that you focus most of your attention on abiogenesis rather than evolution. Intelligent Design actually focuses primarily on evolution, arguing that certain subsystems of already complex lifeforms cannot have arisen naturally. Unfortunately for ID's supporters, every example they have proposed has been shot down in flames, with clearly plausible evolutionary pathways identified.

What's more, we know that evolution happens. It's quite simple: We can see it happening. Whether all the details of the theory as it presently stands are correct is a question for considerable research and debate, but evolution is real, and it continues today.

We have seen, for example, a bacterium evolve the ability to eat nylon. This is not something that already existed, since we have earlier samples of the bacterium in question and they could not digest nylon at all. What's more, until quite recently there was no nylon for them to eat.

What's even more interesting is that we know exactly how this happened. It wasn't mathematically improbable, and did not require the hand of the divine (or of time travellers or space aliens, as some of the fellows of the Discovery Institute would have it). It was a single mutation, where part of one gene was copied into the wrong place. This then coded for a new protein, an enzyme that allowed the bacterium to digest nylon.

Read some of the work of the late Stephen Jay Gould. His work is marvellously accessible; he truly loves his subject matter and wants to share it with people. You can start with his collections of essays, beginning with The Panda's Thumb, or pick up Wonderful Life, which is the story of the Burgess Shale, a rock formation which contains marvellously detailed fossils of some of the earliest complex animals.

Give it a try. Please. There is so much beauty there in the world if you are willing to accept and understand it, rather than rejecting it because it does not fit your preconceptions.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 07:59 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 537 words, total size 3 kb.

1 For me the biggest problem with "Intelligent Design" theory is that based on the designs we got, the designer can't have been all that intelligent.   Or else he was a malicious son-of-a-bitch.

Posted by: Steven Den Beste at Sunday, May 14 2006 08:26 PM (+rSRq)

2 At best he was an erratic genius.  We have some truly inspired work, and then we have, for example, the human spine, human male plumbing, possums, and so on.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at Sunday, May 14 2006 08:57 PM (Iwp3n)

3 The main empirical argument against seems to be how unlikely it (allegedly) is in various regards, but I've always thought the weak anthropic principle made that a moot point.   Anyway, it's nice to see both sides can throw out reason when it's inconvenient.   Or else he was a malicious son-of-a-bitch. I guess that depends on your point of view.  Consider your situation, living at the peak (so far) of human civilization versus that of someone from a few hundred or thousand years ago.  The universe turned out to be a lot more convenient that anyone would have thought possible, once we bothered to understand its principles.      

Posted by: TallDave at Monday, May 15 2006 08:11 PM (H8Wgl)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
44kb generated in CPU 0.0129, elapsed 0.1287 seconds.
56 queries taking 0.1209 seconds, 235 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.