Count me as one of those. I know of no verified accounts of that happening.
Please enlighten me.
Trust in the LORD with all your heart,
and do not rely on your own insight.. Pr. 3:5
Ron Chitwood
chitw@flash.net
----------
> From: Lloyd Eby <leby@nova.umuc.edu>
> To: Ron Chitwood <chitw@flash.net>
> Cc: evolution@calvin.edu; Glenn Morton <grmorton@waymark.net>
> Subject: Re: half-evolved feather pt 2
> Date: Thursday, April 16, 1998 8:02 PM
>
> On Thu, 16 Apr 1998, Ron Chitwood wrote:
>
> > The whole concept of macroevolution is an error. When schoolchildren
are
> > confronted with the bias and preconditioned macroevolutionary responses
and
> > see, really see, what flimsy supports it really has they turn from
science
> > to other pursuits, unless they go along with the 'Emperor's New
Clothes'
> > idea that permeates our higher education philosophy at present. By the
> > way, there is no 'fossil evidence'. Even your quote indicates it is
just
> > 'possible' not a confirmed, scientific fact. Your posts seem to assume
its
> > a fact, not a possibility. It is wrong for you to make it so.
>
> It seems to me that there's a confusion here in your post. There *is*
> fossil evidence that change, including macrochanges, in living things has
> occurred in history. Anyone who denies that is, I think, either woefully
> ignorant or disingenuous. Whether the evolutionist (i.e., Darwinian,
> neo-Darwinian, or any other naturalistic variation on those theories)
> account of those macrochanges is or can be correct is a different
> question. The existing fossil evidence may not speak to that question,
> although evolutionists claim (possibly falsely) that it does.
>
> Failure to separate these questions will always result, I think, in
sloppy
> thinking and argumentation.
>
> Lloyd Eby
>