Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site baylor.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!shell!neuro1!baylor!peter From: peter@baylor.UUCP (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: net.origins Subject: Re: Re: Re: Out-of-Context Quote-of-the-Month. July 1985. Message-ID: <341@baylor.UUCP> Date: Mon, 12-Aug-85 10:12:24 EDT Article-I.D.: baylor.341 Posted: Mon Aug 12 10:12:24 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 18-Aug-85 21:22:35 EDT References: <1296@uwmacc.UUCP> <1310@uwmacc.UUCP> <198@kitty.UUCP> <373@scgvaxd.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: Ancient Illuminated Seers of Bavaria Lines: 25 > In article <198@kitty.UUCP> peter@kitty.UUCP (Peter DaSilva) writes: > >> Comment: > >> > >> Dobzhansky falls into the error of supposing that he knows what a > >> creator would do, in asking what the good of having 2 or 3 million > >> species is. How does he know? We cannot say one way or the other, > >> without some form of revelation, which, I think, Dobzhansky would not > >> claim to be party to. > > > >And since we don't know what a creator would do, creationism cannot predict > >anything except through the sort of second-guessing you're reviling. Thus > >creationism isn't a scientific theory. You can believe in it if you want, > >but don't presume to call it science. > > We don't know what a creator "would" do, but we do know what a creator > "did" do. Thus creationism is based on observation of the creation. But it doesn't explain why the creation is the way it is. Can you give me an explanation in creationist terms for the similarity between Homo Sapiens and Pan Troglodytes that doesn't reduce to "Because god wanted it that way"? -- Peter da Silva (the mad Australian) UUCP: ...!shell!neuro1!{hyd-ptd,baylor,datafac}!peter MCI: PDASILVA; CIS: 70216,1076