From: ydobyns@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (York H. Dobyns)
Subject: Re: Logic and God (was: Young earth creationist logic NOT!)
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 22:10:25 GMT

In article <1270@tecsun1.etl.army.mil> riggs@descartes.tec.army.mil (Bill Riggs) writes:
[...]
>	I disagree. The problem is not "fundamentalist/creatist" (your
>words) logic. It is whether or not their "data" is valid and relevant.
>If that data IS valid and relevant, there is no reason to criticize their
>theory as unscientific. 

Incorrect. No matter what evidence creationists may be able to produce,
their theory is unscientific because it is not falsifiable. The ICR
explicitly states that certain propositions concerning matters of
objective fact, namely the creation account of Genesis, are taken as
true _a priori_ and no evidence can be regarded as contradicting them.
This absolutely is not science. The only "unquestionable" in science
is the attitude of empiricism itself, which is not a proposition about
specific facts.

>	Be careful, here. If one takes this statement at face value, then
>any theory becomes valid as long as it predicts correctly. 

Well, that *is* the essence of a correct theory.

>As long
>as my logic is consistent, I can make lots and lots and lots of
>prediction and set up a marvelously good track record for myself, which
>stands up to all but the most detailed analysis (You know, sorta like
>Newtonian physics). But I am wrong, because I can't explain, say, the
>remaining 10% of the problem. 

Deja vu. I'm sure I've seen this bad argument before. *Newtonian 
physics is not wrong*. It is *incomplete.* Relativity and QM are 
*extensions* of the theory whose corrections are negligibly small
under everyday conditions. 

>If creationism
>does a lousy job at documenting the past, how well does evolutionary theory
>predict the future. 

Not its job. Historical sciences work differently from experimental
ones.

>Geez, well, you know evolution is based on pure
>randomness, isn't it ? 

If you think that, you seriously misunderstand evolutionary theory.

>Too much randomness out there to PREDICT future
>development of species, no ? Show me the scientific study of biological
>diversity which explains what is happening out there NOW. And don't try
>telling me that you don't have enough data.

What we have is too much complexity in the biosphere to track
everything. Natural selection (which is only one component of evolution,
I know) is a directive force with no random elements. However, to 
predict the effects of selection pressure, you need to know everything
about a species' environment. It may very well be that the interactions
are sufficiently nonlinear that the course of evolutionary change is
inherently unpredictable, like the weather. Do you think our inability
to predict weather patterns two weeks in advance represents a failing
of fluid dynamics theory?

[a previous poster, whose attribution I lost:]
>>Once again we see that the creationists ignore the Word of God as
>>written in the very molecules for the words of men in a book.
>
>	Well, this is fascinating. The author shifts from science to
>theology practically without a pause. I suppose it is just as romantic
>to believe that God wrote his word on our genes, waiting for us to find it,
>as it is to believe that He left those tablets on the mountain for Moses to
>pick up. This kind of sophistry really ticks me off.

This kind of simple-mindedness really ticks *me* off. One of the primary
elements of the religious doctrine creationists *claim* to espouse is
that God is manifest in his works as well as through scripture. (Actions
speak louder than words, and all that.) Whoever-he-was (and I apologize
for losing his name) pointed out, quite legitimately, that by ignoring
the material evidence they undermine their own doctrine. Apparently you
are either too ignorant of the topic of debate or unable to reason to
sufficient logical depth to figure it out. 

Yes, that was a flame. "Sophistry" is a fighting word in these circles.

York Dobyns		ydobyns@phoenix.princeton.edu