"Stephen E. Jones" writes
in message <200003141430.WAA16523@gothic.iinet.net.au>:
> Reflectorites
>
> Phillip E. Johnson has a question which he puts to Neo-Darwinists, and
> which they have great difficulty in answering, and usually evade it by
> blurring the issue and/or counter-attack. Perhaps Richard can answer it
> fairly and squarely without evasion and counter-attack? It is as follows:
>
> "What evidence persuades you, that random mutation and natural selection
> has the fantastic creative power attributed to it by Neo-Darwinists"?
I'll have a go at this. The idea that change with selection
can produce incredible complexities is logical and persuasive
without any supporting evidence. What isn't clear is how much
time is needed to produce the specific complexity we see in
life given only those mechanisms, how significant are other
known mechanisms apart from mutation and natural selection
(genetic drift and extinction, for example) and whether some
mechanisms yet remain to be discovered.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 14 2000 - 12:31:44 EST