Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rtp47.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!mcnc!rti-sel!rtp47!throopw
From: throopw@rtp47.UUCP (Wayne Throop)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Profundity
Message-ID: <109@rtp47.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 25-Jul-85 16:55:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: rtp47.109
Posted: Thu Jul 25 16:55:56 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 28-Jul-85 04:00:19 EDT
References: <2156@ut-sally.UUCP> <347@scgvaxd.UUCP>
Organization: Data General, RTP, NC
Lines: 31

> > [Rich Rosen]
> >As I mentioned in a previous article this level of predictivity does not
> >satisfy some people. 
>
>     But that's not any level of predictivity at all!
>
>     Rich, to tell what will happen BEFORE it happens'.
>
>     Evolution may be many things:
>               [...]
>     ...but it is NOT PREDICTIVE! 
> -michael

Causality shards or no, the theory of evolution *is* predictive.  The
usual example of this is to "predict" that isolation from predators
causes prey species to lose expensive defensive adaptations.  This
prediction can be tested whenever a new, isolated, predator-free
environment is discovered.  There are, of course, other predictive
features, but this is one of the most striking and clear cut.

Note that this is predictive on the level of "rocks fall", not on the
level of precise calculation of the *rate* of fall (and/or the point of
impact).  I assume that this is the "level of predictivity" that Rich is
talking about.

(By the way, whatever happened to the every-ten-day-reminder about the
 lack of creationist explainations for this phenomenon?  Was Dan's reply
 (the only one I know of) considered to satisfy the "termination
 requirement"?)
-- 
Wayne Throop at Data General, RTP, NC
<the-known-world>!mcnc!rti-sel!rtp47!throopw