[MD] The Trouble With Wilber

[Krimel]

Platt,

It is really curious to see you flailing around with this kind of thing.
Sometimes you speak of things evolving. You point out that Pirsig buys into
a version of it and if Bob said it, it must be so. Then you obviously spent
some time thinking about the matter.

So if you think the theory is full of holes. How do you account for it? Are
you buying Johnson and Behe's divine intervention?

Krimel



-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Platt Holden
Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2007 4:43 PM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] The Trouble With Wilber

Krimel accuses Wilber of ignorance about evolution:

Krimel:
> Least anyone think I exaggerate there is this from a "Brief History of
> Everything": 

Wilber: 
> "Take the standard notion that wings simply evolved from forelegs. 
>  It takes perhaps a hundred mutations to produce a functional wing from 
> a leg--a half-wing will not do. A half-wing is no good as a leg and no
> good as a  wing--you can't run and you can't fly. It has no adaptive
> value whatsoever.
> In other words, with a half-wing you are dinner. The wing will work only
if
> these hundred mutations happen all at once, in one animal--also these same
> mutations must occur simultaneously in another animal of the opposite sex,
> and they have to somehow find each other, have dinner, a few drinks, mate,
> and have offspring with real functional wings."

Krimel 
> This could be Philip Johnson or Michael Behe... pulzee.

When I asked what was wrong with Wilber's description, Krimel me referred 
to the following:

http://www.kheper.net/topics/Wilber/Wilber_on_biological_evolution.html.

Here are the writer's objections to Wilber's views:

" 1. The wing of course developed from the long fore-arms of small 
predatory dinosaurs (Coelurosaurs)"

A picture of a Coelurosaur on Wikipedia shows an animal of very short
fore-arms. (Look up Coelurosauria)

" 2.  Feathers are not modified scales." 

A red herring. No where does Wilber say anything about scales.

" 3. Feathers not only help with endothermy, but long feathers may have 
been used by dinosaurs to help brood their eggs; this is an excellent 
example of pre-adaptation. In other words, feathers came before flight.

The first appearance of a tiny feather from a mutation would hardly help 
control body temperature much less help warm eggs.

" 4. The downstroke or flight stroke wing seems to have evolved from the 
maniraptoran prey clutching adaptation. Predatorial maniraptors (e.g. 
Deinonychus, Velociraptor) snapped their powerful arms forward to grab at 
prey; the arms moving down from being held at (or even above) the level of 
the shoulders."

Powerful arms? See photo in Wikipedia mentioned above. 

" 5. When Coelurosaurs originally acquired long feathers there was an 
immediate advantage as an aid in balance when chasing prey or escaping 
their enemies. Even many ground-living birds today hold their wings out 
for balance when running."

How is the first appearance of a tiny feather from mutation going to aid 
in balance?  

Note that the author doesn't address Wilber's question about a how a  
mutant sprouting a tiny feather finds and mates with  a similar mutant so 
their children will possibly have a few skimpy feathers, too -- not that 
the whatever feathers appeared on the children would do them much good 
anyway. (Incidentally, animal parents of mutant children tend to kill them 
immediately.)

If this is the best the proponents of evolution can do in knocking down 
those who question their theory, it's little wonder their theory is 
thought by many to resemble Swiss cheese.

Platt

 
 
moq_discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/