- May 28, 2002
- 16,931
- 514
- 53
- Faith
- Atheist
- Politics
- AU-Labor
A friend of mine has suggested that looking at all the design flaws in animals does not disprove a designer. Indeed, she thinks that all these flaws are strong evidence for 'creation by committee'.
Imagine a committee with limited budget and which is affected by different political interests. We can see such design processes at work in our world today - they usually end up building something that can do the job but which is suboptimal, and often even dangerous.
Her suggestion is that evolution is not as good an explanation as design by committee because over time - given a relatively stable environment - evolution should weed out the flaws. Committees will instead add flawed solutions to original problems and never get anywhere unless they revamp the whole system (explaining mass extinctions).
What point would you suggest I raise with her that could disprove or strongly weigh against her thesis?
Imagine a committee with limited budget and which is affected by different political interests. We can see such design processes at work in our world today - they usually end up building something that can do the job but which is suboptimal, and often even dangerous.
Her suggestion is that evolution is not as good an explanation as design by committee because over time - given a relatively stable environment - evolution should weed out the flaws. Committees will instead add flawed solutions to original problems and never get anywhere unless they revamp the whole system (explaining mass extinctions).
What point would you suggest I raise with her that could disprove or strongly weigh against her thesis?