To Gordon: This way or that way!

...depends on what you meant by "this way."

Since you confessed twice: I used to be a Calvinist as a kid, but no more. Not in the strictest sense.

I am not a theistic evolutionist - nothing to boast about though.

I am a progressive creationist. And I am not a MD, nor a JD...

BTW: Wonder if our lady friend Yu know what we are talking about :) 

I am just teasing you all!! 

 

To Ms. or Mr. Yu!!!

"...because your desposition (sic) to a deity is a harmful trait as a professor of science..."

Yu:

Are you the Yu who likes to cause pain to others? I don't know who you are, but I will forgive you for saying what you said.

BTW, what is [my] "desposition"??

I suggest you read a bit more in the area of history of science. If declaring my faith in a deity is "a harmful trait as a professor of science...", then I am afraid you do not have a clue what science can and can not do!!

You should return to your closet. And shut up, my dear friend.

I am the least interested in giving you another platform to show your ignorances.

DTL

If you are indeed a professor of biology, you will first seek natural explanation to the "signs" you see in nature, you will use scientific inquiry instead of jumping to conclusion that it is "God" -- I am glad that you retired because your desposition to a deity is a harmful trait as a professor of science.

To DTL: God's plan

One more clarification: I am not a Calvinist. I believe that we have freewill to accept or reject God. But I don't believe freewill can override natural laws created by God.

I used this example before: The natural laws of gravity and biology dictate that we cannot jump out from the window of a 50 story building and expect to survive. We invented parachutes and airplanes etc. to overcome this problem. But have we overridden any natural law created by God? No! We are still bound by them. We can only work within these natural laws, not against it.

"God planed it THIS way"

"God did not err, He planned it this way."

I agree with what you said in the first half of the sentence. But the second half...I am not sure if He did plan "it [that] way."

How can you be so sure, my Dr. Gordon?

Because I believe God is in charge of this universe, and all natural laws are under His control!

If God planned it some other way, and things end up not according to his plan, what kind of God is this one?

Are we talking about the same Christian God ???

Seems like you are much more "liberal" than me :-)

To Gordon

"God did not err, He planned it this way."

I agree with what you said in the first half of the sentence. But the second half...I am not sure if He did plan "it [that] way."

How can you be so sure, my Dr. Gordon?

To DTL

Maley’s little piece above is typical of what I call the “language of evolution”. Mother Nature is treated (and revered) as if she can think and reason, and even direct her own path. Father Evolution (praise be to Him!) is the force behind. However, occasional accidents do happen! Father Evolution, like all of us, can err afterall!

I am basically a "Theistic Evolutionist" (and a good friend of Dr. Alex Yu, just in case you think that I am attacking him -- I may not agree with him 100% of time, but we can openly share different ideas). I found your above comment interesting.

If bad outcomes happened, why does it has to be because "Father Evolution erred"? Can God just planned it this way? "Bad outcome" is from our perspective only. This may be exactly what nature needs.

If high level creatures (like homo sapiens) keep "evolving" without built-in control mechanisms, could they one day become immortal? What would this do to other species? So, single cell organisms have built-in mechanism for apoptosis, multi-organ creatures can also have built-in mechanisms for self-termination. Cancer can be one of these mechanisms.

Theologically, another completely different line of reasoning is that evolution is an ongoing process. In a fallen world, imperfection is expected, bad outcome will occur. God did not err, He planned it this way.

If I had misunderstood you, please correct me.
Gordon Wong PhD MD JD

The language of evolution

 

 

在漫長的地球歷史裡面，物種滅絕的機會高於進化的機會，進化包含了生物和文化兩個層面，但人類的文化活動，卻為進化帶來了難以預測的變數。一位學者甚至說：「進化是一場意外。」吉特沒有提過「進化是意外」，這說法比起吉特派更加吉特。

 

***************

物種滅絕…進化機會…文化活動…難以預測的變數…「進化是一場意外」…

 

Echoing CH Yu’s comment above, I find the following statements of Carlo Maley (Wistar Institute, in today’s Philadelphia Inquirer) fascinating.

Maley views cancer as an evolutionary process. At the root of the disease is our distant ancestry as single-celled organisms and the tendency for our cells to occasionally revert to their old ways (italics mine).

… Among other things, Maley goes on, we share a system of storing and encoding information in DNA and many of the same genes.

The big difference is that human cells are programmed to cooperate (Question 1; see below), thus working together to make an organ or a body work (Question 2), while microbes are selfish (Question 3), each one competing for better ways to survive and reproduce (Question 4).

But such selfish capacity is latent in our own cells, and sometimes one of them starts to revert to its ancient ways.

“This breakdown of cooperation”, according to Maley, is what we call cancer.

 

Maley’s little piece above is typical of what I call the “language of evolution”. Mother Nature is treated (and revered) as if she can think and reason, and even direct her own path. Father Evolution (praise be to Him!) is the force behind. However, occasional accidents do happen! Father Evolution, like all of us, can err afterall!

 

(Question 1): If human cells are “programmed to cooperate, who programs them?

(Question 2): “…working together to make an organ or body work”? That’s simple! Why does an organ or body part have to work at all? Who or what directs the appearance of our secondary teeth at the right time? Or the appearance of myriads of reproductive features in both the male and female sexes, enabling the survival of a species? If the answer is our DNA, who put DNA "there" to begin with?

(Question 3): Our microbe friends are selfish? How on earth do you know that?

(Question 4): Competing for better ways to survive and reproduce? So, this is HOW we got all these species and species! All because of the selfish microbs! This is reasoning after the fact. And entirely anthropomorphic!

 

So, our cells are selfish too. And they become mischievous and rebellious at times. And "bam" goes the CANCER!!!

 

Chance vs providence

To the person who made this comment: “先入為主的偏見﹐當隨筆可以﹐但未必可以原諒。”, my reply is: I am afraid you did not comprehend what the author was trying to say. 偏見?? 原諒?? There is nothing that he needs to be excused of! 

I find myself agreeing with the author: ”人類文明還未曾毀滅，是否由於來自超自然的眷顧？假設進化論是正確，但物競天擇的原則可能導致進化，也可以導致退步，亦可以導致絕子絕孫，到底進化過程所倚賴的所謂偶然條件，是否純屬偶然呢？

I am a humble retired professor of biology. In nature, I do see signs - plenty of them - of the “invisible God.”

「機會」的問題

兩個 mutually exclusive 的 events A 和 B，
P（A）>> P（B）
但是這不代表 B 就不能出現，或者 B 的出現就是神蹟。

在文化引至滅亡這點上，文化需要發展到某一程度，才有能力去做成世界末日這類情況，我們有這能力只不過是不到 100 年的事，難保不會發生。

真的令我很失望

人類文明還未曾毀滅，是否由於來自超自然的眷顧？

 

余先生﹐你是學者﹐也懂得科學方法﹐也懂得人類在地球歷史上﹐僅僅只是一刻﹐根本不似恐龍有一億年﹐人類文明還未曾毀滅﹐也可以說是人類is not around long enough to be "selected" / "delected" by nature

先入為主的偏見﹐當隨筆可以﹐但未必可以原諒。