bees@drux3.UUCP (10/26/83)
There have been a few articles recently that say that insects
becoming immune to certain pesticides is an example of evolution.
It seems that this example is a far cry from the transition of
ape-caveman-man. The fact that living organisms have the ability
to adapt, in certain ways, to their environment is not proof that
they have the ability to evolve major changes in form and function.
I have seen many "lines" of evolution illustrated by examples of
fossils, and leading to modern organisms. I always wondered where
the fossils of the transitional creatures went. You can find lots
of prehistoric monkeys, lots of cavemen, and lots of modern men,
but where are the fossils of the creatures that slowly evolved
from one step to another.
I am not discounting the possibility of evolution or something
similar. I am saying that, in my opinion, the theory of evolution
requires as much faith as the theory of creation.
Ray Davis AT&T Information Systems Laboratories Denver
{ihnp4|hogpc}!druxy!bees (303)538-3991ajs@hpfcla.UUCP (11/06/83)
#R:drux3:-85700:hpfcla:21300001:000:1979 hpfcla!ajs Nov 4 16:05:00 1983 Sigh... The theory of evolution requires HYPOTHESIS, not FAITH. In this case the latest (best) hypothesis is that evolution is punctuated, so the odds of finding "smooth-slope" transition fossils are very small. As Richard Dawkins says, "The universe is populated by stable things." That goes for species, too. If you look around, you can find lots of "isolated" species as well as "similar" species. Either way, it is precisely their (stable) differences that lets us recognize them as different species. I see creationists creating a non-existent problem out of thin air: If a species exists, it can't be transitional, since it is separate (by definition). So, they then ask, where are the transitional fossils? They are guilty of splitting hairs. You can find a nice series of transitional horse fossils (each a separate species) from small mammals to current forms. You can also find a very nice series from apelike creatures to modern man, if you don't ignore the evidence, or insist on too fine a resolution. Dramatic, successful mutations -- those which have survival value and fork new, distinguishable species -- are probably quite rare, and when they do appear, they obviously spread lightning-fast compared to geologic time. The average nature of the world is extreme stability, with distinguishable species that change little over human times. --> FLAME ON: Creationists seem to know what they WANT and will rationalize to any lengths to support their world-view. Scientists, however, tend to generalize from the observable evidence, even if the conclusions are painful (e.g., humans are very small drops of space and time in a vast cosmos). In my opinion, creationists are blind to their own wishful thinking and to the true scope of time and space. Always willing to help my memes in the battle for survival, Alan Silverstein (meme: see "The Mind's I", article by Dawkins)
Pucc-H:aeq@CS-Mordred.UUCP (11/08/83)
The theory of evolution requires HYPOTHESIS, not FAITH. Too bad this isn't taught in the schools. I remember numerous texts which taught evolution as if it were an established fact, rather than the hypothesis which it is. -- Jeff Sargent/...pur-ee!pucc-h:aeq