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!ut-sally!utastro!bill
From: bill@utastro.UUCP (William H. Jefferys)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Origin of Species
Message-ID: <155@utastro.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 28-May-85 17:46:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: utastro.155
Posted: Tue May 28 17:46:54 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Jun-85 11:58:44 EDT
References: <1148@uwmacc.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: U. Texas, Astronomy, Austin, TX
Lines: 51

> How does one account for the origin of species without accounting for
> the origin of the first species?  That seems just a little too
> convenient.  But your statement is false in any case.  The notion that
> chemical evolution is integral to the theory of evolution is widespread.
> (Miller and Fox come to mind.)  The BSCS (high school biology
> curriculum) "Blue edition", for example, is titled "Molecules to Man".
> I just saw this in a library the other day, so I looked in it out of
> curiosity.  The chapter preceding the one on (what Jeff calls)
> evolution was about - you guessed it - abiogenesis.  Evidently there
> was no such false dichotomy between the beginning of life and
> speciation of existing life in the minds of the editors.
> 
To demonstrate that the theory of evolution is independent of the
notion of abiogenesis, it is sufficient to point out that many
individuals believe that primitive life was created by a Creator,
and that once this miracle occurred, evolution over billions of
years eventually produced what we see today.  This is a version
of theological evolutionism, and is a perfectly respectable position.
I may be wrong, but it is my impression, reading Fred Hoyle's recent
writings, that he subscribes to a view something like this.

The following chart shows four positions that have been or are held by
reasonable people, classified by two distinguishing characteristics:


		Creation		Abiogenesis

Without		"Creationism"		"Spontaneous Generation"
evolution				(Ruled out by Pasteur's
					experiments).

With		"Theological		"Standard Evolutionism"
evolution	Evolutionism"
		(As described
		Above)


Yes, it is true that most scientists believe in abiogenesis.  Yes,
it is true that a discussion of abiogenesis naturally leads to a discussion
of evolution.  But the two most certainly can be discussed in isolation
from each other.  The fact of evolution is entirely independent of
the possibility of abiogenesis.

-- 
"Men never do evil so cheerfully and so completely as when they do so from
	religious conviction."  -- Blaise Pascal

	Bill Jefferys  8-%
	Astronomy Dept, University of Texas, Austin TX 78712   (USnail)
	{allegra,ihnp4}!{ut-sally,noao}!utastro!bill	(uucp)
	bill%utastro.UTEXAS@ut-sally.ARPA		(ARPANET)