On Sun, 23 Jul 1995 21:10:24 -0400 (EDT) you wrote:
>Stephen Jones states (among other things):
>
SJ>"If evolutionists completely disowned Darwin, then "Christians"
>would stop attacking aspects of his thought that are still held by
>evolutionists today."
GS>While some Christians might find this attractive, I believe this is
>an unreasonable expectation: To explain my point, consider Newton,
>whose views on mechanics have been superseded by Einstein's. Newton
>had it wrong. But we don't find physicists "disowning" Newton. Why
>is this? Because they still see a great deal of value in what Newton
>had to say. Indeed, Newtonian mechanics is still taught today.
Your extract is out of context. Glenn was criticising me for quoting
Darwin. My point to him was that until evolutionists disowned Darwin,
then "Christians" (Glenn's original word - not mine) would continue
attacking him.
BTW, I think that Darwin was a great scientist. He deserves a
permanent place in science's hall of fame for his theory of
micro-evolution. It is his extrapolation from that special theory of
micro-evolution to a general theory of macro-evolution, that I believe
was not warranted:
"Since 1859, a vast amount of evidence has accumulated which has
thoroughly substantiated Darwin's views as far as microevolutionary
phenomena are concerned. Evolution by natural selection has been
directly observed in nature, and it is beyond any reasonable doubt
that new reproductively isolated populations - species - do in fact
arise from pre-existing species. Although some of the details of the
process are still controversial, and certain aspects of the modern
view of speciation differ slightly from Darwin's, it is clear that the
process involves a gradual accumulation of small genetic changes
guided mainly by natural selection.
But while his special theory has been confirmed, its general
application, the grand claim that, in Mayr's words:
`...all evolution is due to the accumulation of small genetic changes
guided by natural selection and that transpecific evolution is nothing
but an extrapolation and magnification of the events which take place
within population and species...' (Mayr E., "Animal Species and
Evolution", 1963, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, p586)
remains as unsubstantiated as it was one hundred and twenty years ago.
The very success of the Darwinian model at a microevolutionary level,
and particularly the mode of its success - by rigorous empirical
documentation of actual evolutionary events and thoroughly worked out
models showing precisely how the process of speciation and
microevolution occurs - only serves to highlight its failure at a
macroevolutionary level."
(Denton M., "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis", 1985, Burnett Books,
pp344-345)
God bless.
Stephen