Truman Green's science rumours

May 20, 2010

Evolution or Intelligent design?

Filed under: Uncategorized — trugreen1 @ 3:05 am

I received the following comment from Daniel Reynolds on May 18, 2010 which was placed after my first post back in November 2009..

“Thank you for your informative site, Truman. I noticed in your article in New Dawn No. 120 that you ‘became interested in the intelligent design-evolution debate in the 1980s’ . I’d be interested to know in brief what your conclusion was.”

Thanks for the comment, Daniel, and thanks for reading my article on flu vaccine efficacy  in New Dawn.

Briefly, I have come to the conclusion that ‘intelligent design’ furnishes the best explanation of the manner in which life has progressed here on earth.

This is a vastly complex question and I intend to write an explanatory  piece on the subject on my blog in the near future.  If you google: “Truman Green Irreducible Complexity” you will go to Larry Moran’s science blog. Some of my reasons for deciding in favour of intelligent design are presented in the debate in which I participated.

 Thanks again for your question, Daniel. Please comment here again if you find something interesting or provocative in the Irreducible Complexity debate. 

Truman

Advertisements

2 Comments »

  1. Hi again, Daniel

    I meant to respond to this before but I think you’ve hit the nail
    on the head several times here. Suffice to say maybe Elizabeth Sahtouris, a well-known biological evolutionist, wrote in only a few words what you’ve expressed:

    “It’s very complex; it seems as though it was designed.”

    From “A Message to us from our Genome,” by Elizabeth Sahtouris.

    Thanks,
    Truman

    Comment by Truman Green — January 17, 2011 @ 12:16 am

    • And also, Daniel, I wouldn’t get too excited about instantly-invented words like Dawkins’ “meme” or this “pleonasm” you’ve
      mentioned here to denigrate the expression “intelligent design.”

      I use the word as a contrast to the words “randomly designed,” which are implicit in the “natural selection” paradigm.

      As you well know, eh, Daniel.

      The idea is that random collisions of nucleotides, amino acids, proteins, tissues and organisms just don’t cut it
      when serious consideration of “origins” is involved.

      Choices are being made, but I, at least, have no idea of the nature of the thing that is making the choices in “designing”
      the elements of life and choosing which ones will become extinct, as has happened to 96% (or so) of all the species that have ever lived.

      Truman

      Comment by Truman Green — January 17, 2011 @ 12:25 am


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: