What is a "Darwinist'?

From: Bertvan@aol.com
Date: Sat Aug 12 2000 - 20:41:45 EDT

  • Next message: Brian D Harper: "Re: More about teaching the controversy"

    << Huxter:
    >> >And why do you insist on using that moniker? Whne[pardon my typo]
    >>>referring to
    >>>evolutionists?
     
     Bertvan:
    >> Because I am not necessarily skeptical of "evolution", only Darwin's
    >>version: random mutation and natural selection. This is true of most IDs.

    >Huxter I wasn't aware that Darwin said anything about mutations. How many
    actual
    >Darwinists do you know? You do realize, skepticism or no, there is evidence
    >for selection, right?

    Bertvan:
    Hi Huxter, Are you telling me "random mutation and natural selection" isn't
    Darwin's term? (It's not my bible and I don't keep a copy handy, but I'm
    sure someone else on the list knows whether Darwin actually used the term.) .
     Some form common ancestry was discussed decades before Darwin, and I believe
    Darwin's contribution was the theory that life's complexity was the result of
    small random changes, (without plan, purpose or design) , and that those
    organism with the most advantageous (complex?) changes thrived and produced
    progeny at the expense of those lacking such advantageous mutations. Thus
    natural selection supposedly (gradually) "designed" complex organisms. (If
    this is not your belief, we might not necessarily be in disagreement.)

     The only person on the list I've asked if they believe random mutation and
    natural selection created life's complexity was Susan, and she proudly
    announced she did. Most who write about evolution acknowledge the term,
    "random mutation and natural selection". Certainly Dawkins does, as does
    Gould. Any biologist who questions "random mutation and natural selection"
    as the designer of life's complexity is promptly attacked as an
    anti-evolutionist, such as Denton or Behe. Both believe in common descent.
    Our own Steve Jones believes in common descent, as do most people supporting
    ID. If anyone admits they don't know how life's complexity arose, I don't
    disagree with them. Yes, I know selection probably occurs. It selects
    traits and genes already in the gene pool. I question that it is responsible
    for creating complex, novel organs, systems and body parts. Those were
    "created" by the "mutations". I'm skeptical that those mutations occurred
    without plan, purpose, or design. Since that is something that can be
    neither proved nor disproved at this point, I insist that everyone is
    entitled to their own judgement on the matter.

    Bertvan
    http://members.aol.com/bertvan



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Aug 12 2000 - 20:41:53 EDT