I am not going yet to get into this as deep as my thought on this acutally goes as I am hoping others will pick up on some other things I have recently posted so as not to let this thread "die" I will start with a quote from HLK Whithouse's Chapter 13 The theory of the genetic code @13.1 which printed
"Dounce (1952) and, apparently, Gamow (1954) had the brilliant idea that the linear sequence of nucleotides in nucleic acids was responsible for determining the linear sequence of amnio acids in the polypeptide chains of protein molecules. That the linear construction of the genetic material might relfect the linear structure of the specific polypeptides was a highly original idea of attractive simplicity."p203
I will be suggesting that this induction is in fact false no matter how bright it may appear and abducts the wrong materiality. I will be attempting to construct an axiom system from which a better deduction can be gained. If I am correct the relation of parrallels and orthogonals is more complex than this determinant in evaluation of the creationist argument from similiarity given Gould's notion of convergence. While this last sentence may be unobjectionable as it stands the paticular philosophy I envelop it with may. It may raise the objection I need to remand if I am to argee somewhat with Gould against Wolfram that Natrual Selection was "over sold." We cant tell a priori, we need to find out in nature not from it.
The book reference title was, "Towards an Understanding of the Mechanism of Heredity"
[This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 11-02-2003]
™ Version 4.2