Andy wrote:

>On Thu, 21 Sep 2000, Todd Moody wrote:
>> Indeed.=A0=A0Nobody would deny that.=A0=A0Still, it is perfectly
>> reasonable to say that *given what we know now*, the spontaneous
>> emergence of self-replicating systems from prebiotic soup in the
>> probable windows of time available is vanishingly small.
>
>Disagree. If the margin of error exceeds the resolution of the calculation=
 by
>many orders of magnitude, then the statement simply becomes meaningless.

Then the same problem infects *all* origins theories, since all are
subject=
 to the same epistemic limits.

>> Sure, and if you or anyone else has a theory of how fractal
>> geometry can get self-replicating proto-cells out of a random
>> soup of amino acids and nucleic acids, then that would count
>> against the Intelligent Design theory.=A0=A0The mere conjecture,
>> however, than someday someone might develop such a theory
>> doesn't.
>
>Disappointed. I made no conjecture. Also, I didn't offer fractal geometry =
as a
>solution to this problem, I simply used it as an example to demonstrate th=
at a
>complex system needn't be an unlikely event.

Sure, but is it a relevant example?  Nobody doubts that complex
systems, su=
ch as crystals, needn't be unlikely.  But we're talking about the kind
of c=
omplexity found in living things.  If that kind of complexity lends
itself =
to an explanation in terms of fractal geometry, fine.  Then you have a
theo=
ry.  If not, then the fact that fractal geometry is complex is
irrelevant t=
o the question at hand.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]