Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Dylan,Thomas's avatar

Hello,

I will get straight to the question.

What are some of your own personal observations, regarding previously unknown differences AND similarities with the younger generation across the multiple nations that you have done the Street Epistemology?

Thank you

Hope your move was smooth and your not living out of boxes, at this point.

Expand full comment
Abraham H.'s avatar

Thank you for hosting these AMAs, I am excited to hear what Reid has to say! Thank you, Peter, Gina, and Reid! I have the NPR question that I would love to hear Peter and Gina’s thoughts on since they both were in the “All Things Reconsidered” series. I also have a new question for both Peter and Reid. It is perhaps the same question asked in two different ways, so I welcome their answers on either or both questions.

The NPR Question

When the ENCODE project claimed roughly 80% of the human genome has purpose, NPR ran an article framing the new discoveries as the biological functions of "junk DNA" potentially eventually explaining how macro-evolution occurred. https://www.npr.org/2011/08/19/139757702/dont-throw-it-out-junk-dna-essential-in-evolution Do you think NPR's article is a fair representation of the significance of this discovery and the historical debate surrounding the term "junk DNA"?

Example article about the ENCODE project findings: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11247

The New Questions

For Peter:

Should humanoid aliens be a surprise or an expectation? If, given the right conditions in the correct sequence, the probability of life in other parts of the universe has a probability approaching 1 or 100% because the fossil record is evidence that there exists a natural pathway to life here on earth similar to a recipe, would this diminish the weight of the argument of homology as evidence of common ancestry? If it is bound to happen elsewhere in the universe multiple times, why not here as well?

For Reid:

If scientists could prove that two specific animals never shared a common ancestor, would that convince you that macro-evolution never happened, and would your answer change as the “number of animals without a common ancestor” grows larger? Which two or more animals would scientists need to prove did not have a common ancestor [observed evidence E] for you to conclude the following statement is true?

[Observed evidence E] combined with reason is sufficient, to assume that the “gaps” in our knowledge of how macro-evolution occurred, will [never] be filled by further scientific inquiry.

Thank you for considering my questions!

As a side note, I can’t take credit for coming up with this question. I was introduced to the puzzle concerning probability by Paul Nelson. I hope I reproduced his question accurately. Here is his relevant presentation for reference:

Testing Universal Common Descent - Part 4 - Dr Paul Nelson

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4Rz7KpDfRI

Expand full comment
11 more comments...

No posts