From: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata FSO)
Subject: Re: Evol & God : CANNOT Co-exist!
Reply-To: ata@hfsi.UUCP (John Ata FSO)
Organization: HFSI, McLean VA.
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 22:54:52 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.071903.21915@ttinews.tti.com> bsmart@bsmart.TTI.COM (Bob Smart) writes:
>In <1992Aug28.003330.4541@ccu.umanitoba.ca> vnelson@ccu.umanitoba.ca
>(Gerald Vernon Nelson) writes:
>> God playing evolution, is CREATION.
>
>So what?  You seem to be arguing that evolutionary theory is somehow
>primarily an attack on God.  In fact, evolution is simply a concept that
>people can use to help them organize and predict natural phenomena (like
>any other theory, in fact).  To the extent that "evolution" is a useful
>tool for prediction or explanation of observations, it's a worthwhile
>theory.  NONE of this has anything to do with attacking or refuting God;
>that simply isn't the business of science. Also, NONE of this requires
>that the THEORY of evolution has to be "right."  The only requirement is
>that PREDICTIONS based on evolutionary theory match with observation. 
>As long as the end result is correct, the theoretical model used to get
>there is beside the point.
>
>Scientists like evolutionary theory because it works (its predictions
>correspond closely with observations), not because it's "right."  When
>somebody comes up with another theory that either makes more accurate
>predictions, or does just as well but is simpler, evolutionary theory
>will get dumped...not because it was "wrong," but because a better (more
>accurate/simpler) tool has become available.
> 
>If we postulate a system where God sets up laws of nature and sets the
>wheels in motion, you've said you'd call that "Creation."  I say, call
>it whatever makes you happy--but "Creation" doesn't help understand how
>the world works.  Theories about evolutionary biology don't REQUIRE the
>involvement of God, but neither do they forbid it (at least in the
>limited sense of God as a starting impulse to get the whole system
>rolling).  Whether organisms develop and change as they do because of
>mechanistic evolutionary mechanisms, or because God makes them do it
>just that way, is irrelevant; as long as I get good predictions, that's enough.
>
>What predictions about biological diversity does Creationist "theory"
>make, and how are these predictions better than those of evolotionary
>biology?  Evolution isn't about God; it's about biology.  When I want to
>know what happens after you die, I'll ask a religious authority; when I
>want to understand what might produce (or prevent) the appearance of
>drug-resistant microbes, I'll ask a biologist.  It DOESN'T MATTER
>whether the biologist understands the fundamental nature of God, or even
>whether the biologist's theory of the way living things work is "really"
>correct; all that matters is that I get the right answer about the
>behavior of living organisms.  Even if I get the right answer for the
>wrong reason, I'm still in possession of the right answer.  As a
>practical matter, science is about observable, verifiable conclusions,
>and theories are merely a means to an end.
>
>Science doesn't tell us, "this is how the world works."  Science tells
>us, "the world appears to behave AS IF it worked something like this." 
>How is that incompatible with religious faith?
>
>---------
>
>bsmart@bsmart.tti.com -- or if that fails, fall back to

I couldn't have said it better myself.  You have taken the words out of 
my mind and written them better than I ever could.  Thank you.
-- 
John G. Ata - Technical Consultant | Internet:     ata@hfsi.com
HFS, Inc.		  VA20     |     UUCP:     uunet!hfsi!ata
7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601	   |    Voice:	(703) 827-6810
McLean, VA  22102	           |      FAX:	(703) 827-3729
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:16015 talk.origins:10933