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