Now that I have some free time while the windows in my home get replaced and the landscapers are tearing up my yard, I think it is a good time to look back on one month of blogging at Evolution Engineered (EE).
It has been an interesting and informative experience. I have been blessed with thoughtful commentators who make very good points. There have been lessons learned, projects started and in-progress, and just a whole lot of fun in between. Where to start?
There are two that immediately come to mind.
1. The evolution debates that I have been involved in have yielded surprising results (to me, anyway). I was expecting to debate the merits of the Neo-Darwinian Evolutionary Synthesis (NDES) espoused by Julian Huxley and, more recently, Richard Dawkins.
That didn't happen.
The arguments made by both Paul (from Thinking Christian) and RBH (in Oops, I Did It Again!) did not depend solely on NDES. It was because of this (in part) that I had to take a step back from my debate with RBH to re-assess.
The points made by Paul and RBH, coupled with the Altenberg 16 summit coming up, could very well mean an overhaul of the evolution debate as we (the general public) know it.
2. There are commentators that can keep one honest and help fine-tune one's arguments. I have found that the previously mentioned Paul and Tony Hoffman (in The Expelled Syndrome) fit that role to a T. Commentators like those two mean I will have to be extra dilligent in future posts, which is a good thing.
Of Mud Pies and Proteins - The C.D.F.
EE was created, in part, to serve as a launching point for the Conceptual Design Framework. As all readers can see, it is a work in progress. There are two items I am examining at this point.
1. The Toddler Mud Pie problem. Is this an example of no-design or a low-level design?
2. Proteins - I am assembling an argument of design based on the C.D.F. There is still much to review and ponder on this.
These two items are not the only issues facing the C.D.F. - and yes, I do find it a little humbling that only I have commented on it thus far (is it THAT bad???). I look forward to developing the C.D.F. in the near future.
Reviews, Reviews, Reviews
The review of a chapter in Know Why You Believe by Paul Little was my first ever review. I am looking to get better with future reviews:
1. The Abolition of Man by C.S. Lewis - a planned three-part series, each part dealing with each lecture (Men Without Chests, The Way, and The Abolition of Man).
2. The Privileged Planet by G. Gonzolez and J. Richards - my favourite "ID" book.
Three words: universal common descent.
My debate with RBH started with a lingering doubt I had over the "certainty" of UCD. It was like I have doubts about it, but I can't put into words what exactly bothers me about it (scientifically, not theologically).
Then, I ran across an article in TalkOrigins titled 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent, by Dr. Douglas Theobald. Here is an article that has been fine-tuned and provides a neat summary for all the scientific evidences for UCD (or CD).
I plan on using my engineering training and knowledge of design* to look at and possibly propose alternative explanations for the evidences provided. It will be a huge task to make my case as robust and "iron-clad" as possible.
sigh! Blogging is a lot more work than I thought, but the rewards are worth the effort! I look forward to corresponding with current and future commentators, and to constructive criticisms. Thank you all for keeping your stick on the ice!
Note: I am open to have other engineers make posts on this site. If interested, email me at email@example.com
* Freelurker: I am aware of our previous conversation, but I do believe that engineering design and design in nature have aspects that overlap. If I am out in left field with my points, let me know.