Re: tree-climbing hominids

H. M. Hubey (hubey@pegasus.montclair.edu)
13 Oct 1995 22:55:01 -0400

David Froehlich <eohippus@curly.cc.utexas.edu> writes:

>On 12 Oct 1995, H. M. Hubey wrote:

>Yes there is no determinism in evolution. If you want to talk
>determinism there is a perfectly nice dsicussion group called talk.origins.

Another pointless low blow which requires a similar reposte. First, we
have this problem of what you mean by determinism. Second, that already
puts you at odds with your own field's researchers. Check out the
Cambridge Encyclopedia of HUman Evolution (CEHE). As for me, the question
hangs on the definition of determinism. Given the same change in the
conditions, ceteris paribus, the same results will be obtained. that
makes it deterministic. It can't be any other way. YOu can chew on
this all you want.

>Learn something about historical sciences.

Oxymoron. History and science don't belong together. That explains
your problem.

Everybody wants to get in the act :-).. Next thing, the universities
will start teaching courses in Fine Arts Sciences. By that time
the sciences will have invented a new word, I hope, for science.

>Once more - we should be able to predict observations based on an
>available pattern.

No kidding, Sherlock. See above.

>Even Karl Popper conceded that repeatability is at the level of
>observation, not process. Because experimental science repeats
>observations by repeating the process, confusion has arisen.

You're confused. In the empirical sciences, the process is
repeated, and the problem with some sciences is that their
laboratory is too big and they can't repeat the experiments so
that all they have to go on is to make theories based on patchy
data. In this the field resembles economics. And yet in another
respect, it's better than economics because there are more
measureable things. What's lacking are the measurements.

>Extrapolation implies that you know what is going to happen in the
>future. Now we are in the realm of ESP.

Or economic theory.

Besides, now I'll take you at your word literally and show you
some predictions so as to make you understand the differences
between "science" and "science". I predict that in 2000 AD/CE

1) WAter will boil at 100C
2) water will freeez at 0C
3) Sun will rise in the east every morning
4) all life will be based on hydrocarbons
5) the laws of electromagnetism will continue to hold
6) digital computers will continue to function
7) semiconductors will still operate correctly so that we can
build transistors..

.... you want anymore? I now expect you to certify me as an someone
with powers of ESP.

>Are you a creationist masquerading in paleoanthro clothes?

No, but you seem to be an emotional young boy masquerading around
as a knowledgeable grown up.

-- 





				Regards, Mark

				http://www.smns.montclair.edu/~hubey