Björn Lindberg at
Fri Jun 21 01:52:16 PDT 2002

Steve Bougerolle wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-06-18 at 01:23, Don Smith wrote:
> > You did insult me once, and with an incorrect assertion:
> >
> > "Simple natural selection has been out of favour for over a
> > hundred years.  Update yourself, Don..."
> Well, I apologize if that seemed insulting.  Nevertheless, I believe it
> is true that >simple< natural selection has for over a century been
> considered inadequate to explain how life as we see it could have
> evolved.  Do you consider genetic drift and such things to come under
> the heading of "*simple* natural selection"?  Sexual selection,
> refinement or not, is also something I consider not to be "simple
> natural selection".  Yet what you presented to me was the most basic
> natural selection argument that random changes would give some life
> forms a survival advantage and those would accumulate and so on...
> > These two examples a completely different. The decay rates of Uranium
> > nuclei are well known. Don't use specious arguments. A single-celled
> > organism is way more complex than a uranium nuclei, not to mention an
> > ostrich. Even today, biologists do not fully understand how a bacterium
> > works.
> Atomic nuclei (and atoms in general) are very complex things!  In fact,
> by current knowledge a complete description of their behaviour is
> theoretically impossible, since practically all of them are systems of
> more than two bound objects.  That makes them way more difficult to
> thoroughly understand than cells, which at least have clear structures
> and obvious order.

One cell contains thousands of different substances (enzymes, proteins,
etc) that interact with each other. Many of them are not yet known, and
to model their interactions give rise to massive nonlinear equation
systems. Even if we managed to correctly model this, it would still be a
very coarse model. So I wonder why you think that an atom is more
difficult to understand? I am not really a physicist, which is why I'm

Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-chat' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-chat mailing list