Re: "Real" ringworlds
Krsqk, there is no "mantra" as you put it. Evolution does not deal with how life began. It deals with how life changes. The arguments of how evolution must be wrong because we can't use it to show how life began are irrelevant at best because evolution makes no claims as to how life came from unlife. That topic of discussion is in no way about an evolutionary process. There is no "fyronizing" going on; only explanation of the huge distinction between theories and hypotheses of evolution and those of the origins of life. Several people have already shown that they believe evolution explains the origins of life, when it in fact does not. It is impossible to soundly argue that the theory of evolution is wrong because it does not explain how life began because it does not address that issue in any way. The theory of gravity does not address atomic spin, but noone would say it is wrong because of this. Gravitational force and atomic spin are not related (with current understandings of the physical world) in the same way that evolution and the origin of life are not related.
Most scientific origin hypothesis use evolution in them, yes. But, evolution is still not false if the origin hypothesis is false. This is not to say that evolution is true either, it is to say that no possible connection can be drawn between the two. In fact, it is entirely possible that the form of Creationism in which God created life and then let it go free and the theory of evolution are both true. Evolution does not depend on how life began.
[ May 16, 2003, 23:41: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]
|