In a message dated 4/20/00 1:59:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, cliff@cab.com
writes:
<< Susan Brassfield wrote:
>Abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution. Evolution is about the
>history of life on earth. Abiogenesis is about how that life got started. I
>must have typed those sentences hundreds of times over the years I've
>debated creationists. I've also read them hundreds of times when they were
>typed by other evolutionists in the debate.
This seems like saying that the landing of Columbus in North America
has nothing to do with the history of North America. I don't see why one
would argue that abiogenesis is distinct from evolution, unless one were
thinking that abiogenesis was a product of divine intervention and that
subsequent evolution was not. What other reason could there be for finding
the distinction significant? >>
Actually, it is nothing like that. It is, if anything, more like saying that
the exact structure of the uranium atom must be known before fission will
take place.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 20 2000 - 14:11:00 EDT