Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) Newsgroups: net.origins Subject: Re: An old voice. Message-ID: <1199@pyuxd.UUCP> Date: Wed, 10-Jul-85 22:06:12 EDT Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1199 Posted: Wed Jul 10 22:06:12 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 12-Jul-85 03:54:43 EDT References: <2156@ut-sally.UUCP> <347@scgvaxd.UUCP> <300@azure.UUCP> <350@scgvaxd.UUCP> Organization: Whatever we're calling ourselves this week Lines: 39 > This is just not so! The central hypothesis has been attacked over and > over. When it is, however, netters change their tune and claim that > evidence against evolution is NOT evidence for creation. [BOSKOVICH] 1) It's not, to put it bluntly. Any "evidence against evolution" is merely evidence against a particular proposed methodology for evolution, and evidence against it does not cause creationism to follow logically, much as some might like. 2) Attacking something over and over shows persistence, not proof. Attacking substantively is another matter. > The variations within species are predicted by the creation model. > It has been stated that N.S. predicts everything, therefore it predicts > nothing. This notion of what these models "predict" is most intriguing. The creation model is used as 20/20 hindsight, not in any predictive way. It cannot be used in such a way. (Well, it can, when something unexplained happens, you just say god did it, and that was "predicted" by saying god can and does do everything.) What's more, the other models do not "predict" either, they merely describe what occurs. You couldn't go back 100 million years and look at the world and "predict" that humans or any other animals would evolve. The circumstances that caused those events are so elaborate and intertwining as to make that impossible. What natural selection and evolution "predict" is that, for that set of circumstances that occurs over a period of time, the organisms that survive that period will be the ones best suited for those circumstances, and those of course will be the ones that produce the offspring that follow into the next period. > Evolution really has more problems than you are willing to believe. Oh, yes. For instance, one problem is that it describes human beings as being just another part of the physical spectrum, the "animal kingdom", rather than some special creation of a deity, with special powers and a "soul". Big problem, that is, if you find yourself unable to shirk yourself of that presumption and others like it. -- Like a bourbon? (HIC!) Drunk for the very first time... Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr