Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utastro.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!gymble!lll-crg!dual!mordor!ut-sally!utastro!ethan
From: ethan@utastro.UUCP (Ethan Vishniac)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Prediction or Observation?
Message-ID: <121@utastro.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 23-May-85 10:41:18 EDT
Article-I.D.: utastro.121
Posted: Thu May 23 10:41:18 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 25-May-85 06:42:03 EDT
References: <1125@uwmacc.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: U. Texas, Astronomy, Austin, TX
Lines: 22

Referring to arguments concerning biochemical and morphological evolution
Paul Dubois, after nicely summarizing the evidence, writes
> 
> Would you predict these sorts of things from evolution?  Would you
> predict it from creation?
> 
> Probably not.  How could you?

Of course you could predict it from evolution.  All you need to realize is
that morphological evolution is constrained by the available ecological
niches but most complicated biochemical substances have numerous alternative
and equally useful forms.  In most large organisms this is exagerated by
the fact that much the genetic material present is "silent" and so can be
scrambled indefinitely without causing any untoward effects (as long as it
stays silent).

How could you predict this from creation?

"Don't argue with a fool.      Ethan Vishniac
 Borrow his money."            {charm,ut-sally,ut-ngp,noao}!utastro!ethan
                               Department of Astronomy
                               University of Texas