At 05:43 PM 2/14/00 -0500, you wrote:
>I'm curious how ID opponents resolve one question. Some people believe
>catastrophic events caused the big extinction's, and even the most skeptical
>accept such an event probably caused the dinosaur extinction, which would
>have included most if not all of the more complex organisms. (In this case
>defining complexity as those organisms with the most complex central nervous
>systems.)
it destroyed a lot of the *larger* organisms.
>Yet Nature didn't seem to have started again from scratch.
>Organisms which appeared at that time had even more complex central
>nervous systems than the organisms they replaced.
upon what are you basing this remark? It's not clear from what I read that
we are more complex than dinosaurs. Our own order mammalia was still about
the size of a shrew at that time and our species was 65 million years in the
future. It's fairly clear that we evolved from those little shrew-like
creatures.
>It's as though catastrophes can
>wipe out organisms, but it can't wipe out complexity -- or information.
the information is contained in the genes. If the population is gone the
information is gone. However, through mutation the genes can "make more."
>Just curious whether Darwinists have a naturalistic explanation
We are mammals. We have an enormous amount in common with all other mammals.
At the end of the cretacious a lot of new niches opened up. A lot of new
species evolved to fill them. There are fossils to document nearly all of
the above.
Susan
--------
Peace is not the absence of conflict--it is the presence of justice.
--Martin Luther King, Jr.
Please visit my website:
http://www.telepath.com/susanb
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 16 2000 - 20:04:42 EST