[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Creation/Evolution



>Message was resent -- Original recipients were:
To:
skeptic@listproc.hcf.jhu.edu----------------------------------------------------
---------------------------
In article <Pine.SUN.3.91.950720103416.1037A@efn.org>,
   "Garrison L. Hilliard" <garrison@freenet.hut.fi> wrote:
 
>Darwin's picture of the process of evolution is over a century old, 
>and has been elaborated on and well substantiated since.  What are you 
>offering as an alternative?

Well not Darwin and not Creationism.

>> This weekend on CNN they found fossilized remains of creatures that
>> lived well before plant life was known to exist.
>
>What sort of creatures?  Single-celled organisms?  Mats of bacteria?  
>Yes, these existed long before there were plants.  Are you surprised?

One was described as a 6ft. scorpion.  And some other shelled creatures.
'Theory' coming out of there is that they ate each other in order to survive.
But that's what CNN said.  Wish I knew more, just a matter of e-mail I 
suppose.  

>> Darwins theory is still theory.

>In science, a "theory" means a fundamental principle with wide 
>application and predictive value.  It is not a synonym for "idea", 
>"hypothesis", or "guess."

Yes, and they continue to predict within Darwins Theory.  Everything fits 
nicely into evolution, but that's wrong.  The fossil record shows it, and the 
molecular evidence shows it.  Not entirely, but there are some pretty big gaps 
to fill.  We should see a lot more in-between species in at least the fossil 
record and we do not.