Re: common ancestry

From: Dawsonzhu@aol.com
Date: Thu Jul 27 2000 - 11:55:54 EDT

  • Next message: John Burgeson: "Comment"

    Doug Hayworth wrote:

    << If you do not accept (what I believe to be) the
     overwhelming evidence for common ancestry (in the form of a continuity of
     descent - whether it be unitary, reticulate, mosaic, or otherwise - and
     going at least "way back" in time) then my conclusion is that you have
     either not looked at the evidence or you have interpreted the evidence so
     completely differently that there is no hope to talk about the evidence in
     a meaningful way. >>

    Not to make anything big of this, but if it wasn't such a
    politically charged issue as a whole and if the players
    stayed more in the area of discussion rather than turning
    to politics for a solution..... it might actually be a
    good thing to have people who wrestle with finding an alternative
    explanation. Regretably, it mostly seems to come out as
    "Einstein was wrong" claims, but (pushing the politics aside for
    a brief moment), having a differing opinion is not always bad
    and sometimes it is even good to be stubborn.

    Frankly tough, I basically agree with you.

    By Grace alone do we proceed,
    Wayne



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 11:56:11 EDT