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