Replies

The big question remains: Why is there something rather than nothing? A corollary is: How did the Big Bang create energy, and at least a trilllion trillion trillion kilograms of matter, when we know from the First Law of Thermodynamics that energy cannot be created or destroyed? Despite LGN's protestations, these questions most certainly do relate to ToE, and ToE will remain a partial theory until they are answered.

Oh, I so agree, beckett! And then there is Leibniz's second question: Why are things the way they are, and not some other way? The ToE purports to explain the latter. Yet to the extent that it relies on randomness for its answers, I fail to see what has been explained....

One thing I've noticed about some neo-Darwinists I know: They seem to think that the ToE is somehow a kind of standalone phenomenon that doesn't in any way depend on such things as physics, mathematics, or information theory. They let chemistry in the front door, but then slam it shut to the other disciplines of science.

That to me is just another way in which the Darwinist ToE is a partial account (theory).

I know there is incredible specialization in the natural sciences these days. But the reality is, accounting for the totality of life will need the insights of all the disciplines. Or so it seems to me. FWIW

Thanks for your great essay/post beckett! It's great to see you again.

One thing I've noticed about some neo-Darwinists I know: They seem to think that the ToE is somehow a kind of standalone phenomenon that doesn't in any way depend on such things as physics, mathematics, or information theory. They let chemistry in the front door, but then slam it shut to the other disciplines of science. That to me is just another way in which the Darwinist ToE is a partial account (theory).

The theory of evolution simply states that species can change over time, which is amply supported in the geologic record. It says nothing about the Big Bang, alternate universes, undetectable spirit beings or any of the other things you are fond of speculating about.

Knocking over strawmen is easy but ultimately not very productive.

"Why are things the way they are, and not some other way? The ToE purports to explain the latter. Yet to the extent that it relies on randomness for its answers, I fail to see what has been explained..."

You have it exactly backwards. The theory can only explain why things are the way they are. It cannot predict the path of evolution and it doesn't try to. You are talking nonsense now. Are you saying that the theory should explain humans don't have four eyes? That is silly.

"One thing I've noticed about some neo-Darwinists I know: They seem to think that the ToE is somehow a kind of standalone phenomenon that doesn't in any way depend on such things as physics, mathematics, or information theory."

What are you saying? For the theory to work you certainly have to agree to a certain amount of knowns. Some of them involve physics and mathematics.

I'd love to hear your alternative theory. But I sense that you have none. You've already said you agree with evolution. Please tell me what you are arguing!

Can you PLEASE ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS FOR ME:

What difference would it make to the Theory of Evolution if we found out that a) aliens implanted the first life b) god created the first life or c) life first appeared by a random chemical reaction? How would any of these three effect the Theory of Evolution?

Explain how bacteria can digest nylon.

Explain why whales have reminants of feet.

Explain how AIDS, E. Coli, Ebola and various other diseases came about in the past 25 years.

Explain the Archaeoptryx(I mangled the spelling)fossils.

Explain the entire fossil record.

Let's hear your explanation and then we can match it up with the Theory of Evolution. You are making circular arguments without stating a position because you have none.