Hi Rog, Jonathan, George, George's Wife, All:
ROG:
> For a quick answer to all the BS on evolution that has been making
the
> rounds today, may I suggest the following article on 15 myths on
> evolution.
> As usual, Jonathan -- I mean the Doctor -- is spot on.
>
> The following link shjould take you to a recent Scientific American (is
> this an magazine name an oxymoron, John?))
The link took me to the SA site which said I'd made an error. So I
searched the site with the word "evolution" and came up with the most
relevant article on the list titled "Creationism Evolves" August 1999.
Also tried "15 myths evolution" which came up "No record."
The article "Creationism Evolves" contained a number of questionable
assertions such as, "At heart it (intelligent design) is religious." Since
Jonathan has seen fit to play his credentials card, its only fair to call
in some expert non-religious witnesses for the defense, like Dr. Michael
Denton, MD, PhD, molecular biologist and Senior Research Fellow at
the
University of Otago, New Zealand who said:
"Darwinism is claiming that all the adaptive structures in nature, all the
organisms which have existed throughout history were generated by the
accumulation of entirely undirected mutations. That is an entirely
unsubstantiated belief for which there is not the slightest evidence
whatsoever. . . .The second problem is that there are a vast number of
complex systems in nature, and no matter how unglamorous this
problem, no matter how people try to look the other way, the fact is that
a huge number of highly complex systems in nature cannot possibly be
accounted for in terms of a gradual build-up of small random mutations."
In confirming George Jempty's wife's excellent summary of the
intelligent design argument (24 July post), Dr. Denton said:
"Its (Darwinism) major strength is that smaller-scale biological change
can be adequately accounted for by Darwinian mechanisms. You have
the case of the peppered moth where it is demonstrated to be true that
natural selection has created a biological change. . . . (But) I think it is
totally incapable of accounting for the broad picture, the complex
adaptations required by the tree of life."
I could go on quoting more of Dr. Denton and bringing in other "expert"
testimony from biologists, but I don't want to contribute to what appears
to be a rather widespread notion that this site can be used for just about
anything except the writings of Robert M. Pirsig. So I would ask all, but
especially Jonathan and Roger, "Is Pirsig a creationist?"
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:28 BST