Genetic Rigidity?

From: Chris Cogan (ccogan@telepath.com)
Date: Fri Oct 06 2000 - 00:19:16 EDT

  • Next message: Chris Cogan: "Re: fear of the religious implications of design"

    It seems to be almost required (and for good reason) that a theistic,
    non-Deistic ID theorist argue against what such people call
    "macroevolution" that's supposed to be different not only in *degree* from
    microevolution but also in *kind.* For the moment, I won't let it bother me
    that they are unable to specify in objective, empirically-definite terms
    what that qualitative difference is. What I will let bother me is that this
    claim involves a claim of a necessary "barrier" of some sort that prevents
    any species from evolving sufficiently in a naturalistic way that the term
    "macroevolution" would be properly applicable to this process. Thus, for
    some group of organisms of given type, *every* other type of organism is
    such that it could not have evolved from the given type. Thus, it is
    claimed, there cannot be any naturalistic evolutionary path from early
    mammals to man, because of at least one such barrier.

    The problem with this view is that there is no evidence of any such
    barrier. Macroevolution is claimed to be controversial, and it is, but
    mainly because creationists and ID-theorists seem to *want* it to be, not
    because of any evidence that variations cannot continue to accumulate
    indefinitely until they cross the boundary where the alleged barrier is.

    Also, where *is* that barrier? What (mystical?) criteria or criterion are
    we to use to determine where that barrier is? Is there one between early
    mammals and man? Fine. Is there one between later non-hominid primates and
    hominids? Okay. Then, is there such a barrier between *all* other known
    hominids and man? Well. What about between early man and modern man?
    Between one race and another?

    And, why is the barrier claimed to be wherever it is claimed to be in any
    case?

    Oh, and just what, pray tell, is the nature of this barrier? Just *how*
    does it actually *prevent* further variations that would yield a creature
    that is now "over the line"?

    Of course, I expect the usual evasions from some ID-theory supporters and
    silence from others, but I thought I'd ask anyway.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Oct 06 2000 - 00:23:49 EDT