On Dec 4, 2007 7:39 PM, Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I'll certainly allow that it *may* be true, but > > it certainly isn't proved -- our understanding of evolution is far > > from > > complete. > > Yours may be - that doesn't mean others don't have a far better grasp...
Ah, ad hominem. One doesn't have to be an expert in evolutionary biology to understand the state of knowledge. I'm not an expert software engineer, but I have a pretty good idea of what is possible and what isn't. > > > Everything doesn't arise from competition > > No, but competition does provide much of the direction. And how do you know that? > > > and we have mathematics > > (complexity) that demonstrates that, or at least very strongly > > suggests that > > Darwinian models are substantially incomplete. > > Which particular models are you thinking of? Darwinian ones, as I said. All of them. Complexity poses a serious challenge. > > > I happen to think religion is an emergent phenomenon. > Although "emergent" is a difficult term (and well-loved, yet ill-defined by the complexity folks), I suspect you're right. But calling phenomena "emergent" may be saying little more than "this doesn't come about by any mechanism we can understand other than the way the universe operates." Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
