Re: tests and predictions

From: billwald@juno.com
Date: Sat Apr 15 2000 - 03:28:07 EDT

  • Next message: Stephen E. Jones: "Re: tests and predictions"

    >As this is my first response to one of Bill's posts, a welcome to the
    Reflector
    >from me to him also. Maybe Bill could also tell us a bit about himself?

    Thanks. Graduated from Clarkson University (nee College), Class of '62
    with no backround in biology, just a smattering of engineering. Retired
    after 30 years with the Seattle Police Dept.
    I'm leaning toward theistic evolution - God started the ball rolling but
    doesn't need to micro-manage. <G>

    > As Johnson points out,
    >the "-ism" at the end of "creation" presents it as an ideology, whereas
    >"evolution" (without a corresponding "-ism") is presented as a fact.

    Good point. Thanks for correcting my sloppyness.

    >Bill does not define what he means by "macroevolution". Literally it
    means
    >"large-scale evolution," and can simply mean "evolution above the
    species
    >level":

    OK

    For us less technical people "macro" usually refers to the creation <G>
    of a new specie which won't naturally cross-breed with the old. "Micro"
    being small changes within a specie.

    >But a general theory of Progressive Mediate Creation (PCM) *can* explain

    >the origin of human beings

    I confess I am not familiar with this term. I must read more carefully.

    >Darwinism does not merely "purport to describe historical events". If it
    is
    >to be science and not mere history, it must claim to derive scientific
    principles
    >from natural "historical events" by which it can explain and predict
    past,
    >present and future events.

    Somehow, I don't consider "I found a deep-throated flower therefore I
    predict I will find a long-beaked bird" predicting a future event.
    (someone quoted Darwin something along this line)
    Predicting next year's strain of flu virus makes a better case for
    predictive ability.

    One problem with looking for evidence of macro evolution is that most
    creatures larger than microscopic size have to long a gestation period to
    allow much change to take place within the lifetime of an observer.
    Another problem is that new species are being discovered continually but
    the underlying assumption is they have existed undiscovered and not
    recently evolved. After all, we have only been looking for a couple
    hundred years.

    If I am to uneducated to be useful to the discussion feel free to
    disregard.

    billwald@juno.com

    ________________________________________________________________
    YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
    Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
    Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
    http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 15 2000 - 03:10:19 EDT