Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site uwmacc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!hou3c!hocda!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!hao!seismo!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois From: dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) Newsgroups: net.origins Subject: Re: What are the members of the set of possibilities? Message-ID: <308@uwmacc.UUCP> Date: Tue, 18-Sep-84 09:43:28 EDT Article-I.D.: uwmacc.308 Posted: Tue Sep 18 09:43:28 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 25-Sep-84 08:39:59 EDT References: <1343@cvl.UUCP> Organization: UW Primate Center Lines: 33 > > [Paul DuBois] > > My question is: by saying there are more than > > two theories, do you mean non-creation/non-evolutionary theories, > > or rather that there is more than a single evolutionary theory? > > (For example, the set [classical Darwinism, Neo-Darwinism, > > saltatory evolution]) > [Ralph Hartley] > You are leaving out possibilities again. There is more than one > creation theory as well. Some versions are much simpler than the > "six day" theory (I think I heard a creationist use the phrase "Ocam's > Razor"). For instance it has been hypothesized that God said > "Be!" and everything was. Ok, there are these creation possibilities, for instance: (i) day-age theory - creation took place over several ages, each age seeing a new set of organisms being created. (ii) theistic evolution (this of course would be an evolutionary possibility as well). (iii) recent creation, such as the ICR folks are proponents of. And we can go around about whether the above three are really theories or not. But that's not what I was asking. What I was really asking was: when people use the "there are more than two theories" statement, do you refer to theories that are neither creative nor evolutionary? If so, what are they? -- Paul DuBois {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois "Make me to go in the path of thy commandments; for therein do I delight." Psalm 119:35