Stephen E. Jones wrote:
>>>CL>Wow, a real Darwinian. Huxley's warning against this gradualist
absolutism
>>>>wasn't heeded by Darwin and isn't heeded by you.
>
>Maybe its because Darwin (and Dawkins) had read Paley's "Natural
>Theology" (which I am just finishing)? They realised that *only* tiny, step-
>by-step changes could hope to explain the *fantastically intricate* layers of
>design that Paley documents.
>CL>Plus there are serious mechanical problems in doing
>>certain things gradually, as I outlined in my comments about skeletal
>>elaboration, where I pointed out that articulated bones are intrinsically
>>discontinuous.
>
>Agreed. There are *huge* problems with "doing certain things gradually".
So *only* tiny changes could work, but there are *huge* problems with that.
Stephen has scientifically proved the necessary nature of evolution, and then
drawn the further logical conclusion that there is no evolution. Evolution must
be gradual, so that it can be false.
>Saltationists solutions are just `hand-waving'. That's why they are popular
>with paleontologists who study bones, but never catch on among biologists
>who are intimately aquatinted with the living *details* of life's complex
>designs.
Maybe we saltationists wave our hands, but we're not into intimate aquatinting.
--Cliff Lundberg ~ San Francisco ~ 415-648-0208 ~ cliff@cab.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 24 2000 - 04:21:39 EDT