[Phys-L] Re: Another attack on Evolution

[Hugh Haskell <hhaskell@MINDSPRING.COM>]

At 13:02  -0800 1/25/06, Bernard Cleyet wrote:
> inserting the word "enuf" makes most statements (all?) untestable.  One
> may simply assert when, your example, no new specie has evolved, "you
> didn't wait long enuf".  This may be continued "ad infinitum".
>
> This example may be syntheticised (a bcn) by invoking paleontological
> data and more recently dna mutation rates, etc.
OK, now I understand what you were talking about, and your point is
well-taken. I didn't intend to be making a logically compelling
statement, but I probably should have been more precise. While "long
enough" is clearly not testable, what is clear is that the longer one
has to wait to get the results desired the less likely they are going
to happen. I cannot prove that a new species will evolve in N
generations, but I can say that the fossil record tells us that in
most cases, N is not infinite. And by "most" I mean that in every
case that can be checked by observing the record, N has been shown to
be finite.

I think that this is about the best that any scientific structure can
hope to do. Proofs are not part of our took kit. While logical
inference is, it is the data that settle those arguments that can be
settled and not the logic.

Hugh
--

Hugh Haskell
<mailto:haskell@ncssm.edu>
<mailto:hhaskell@mindspring.com>

(919) 467-7610

Never ask someone what computer they use. If they use a Mac, they
will tell you. If not, why embarrass them?
                        --Douglas Adams
******************************************************
_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l