Sorry, Aaron - you'll get beat up a bit for your post, but I must add my $0.02 as well. Creationists and ID proponents frequently cite the "evolution-is-only-a-THEORY" argument in favor of their position. (And, like you, they often emphasize the word "theory" as if it were some kind of epithet.) The perception that a scientific theory is only conjecture and, therefore, just as valid as any other unproved or unsupported premise indicates a misunderstanding of the scientific method. As scientists use the term, a theory is a proposition that can be tested or demonstrated through inquiry and rational thought processes. By definition, the broader implications for Darwin's theory of evolution, that is, evolution on a macro scale (geologic timescale), cannot be tested in the laboratory. Instead, the theory appears to hold generally true for evidence gleaned from the fossil record. It is still called a theory rather than fact because it has not been, and perhaps may never be, proven beyond doubt. However, that limitation, alone, does not render the theory invalid. The findings in favor of the theory are much more numerous than arguments against it. Therefore, scientists say that the theory is valid. In this instance, "valid" does not mean "proven." Scientists do (and the rest of us should) await greater enlightenment. Until then, if a theory works, most scientists will embrace it. I've always been interested to observe that creationists and ID'ists (what should one call those who support ID?) argue that there appears to be no "missing link" between early primates and modern humans. On the other hand, I have neither read nor heard their explanations for the numerous fossils that have been found that seem to show a direct lineage from some earlier primate. Even if one dismisses the earliest fossils, say those over a few thousand years old, how does one explain Neanderthals and other relatively recent but extinct human life forms? An evolutionary tree with one or more early "human" forms with extinct branches makes sense - well, for me, anyway. What is the creationist explanation for this? I'm not belittling, but asking. Can anyone enlighten me? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lambert, Aaron" <Aaron.Lambert@Williams.com> To: "Utah Astronomy" <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 12:47 PM Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] science and religion | Allow me to show the flip-side of the coin. | | I strongly resent some evolutionists as characterizing | rank and file creationists as being "non-scientists". | HOW DARE THEY?!! This reeks of intellectual elitism. | | How can "scientists" admit that, "the fossil record | is not complete..." yet also argue so vehemently | that any alternative ideas are preposterous? The | THEORY of evolution is just a THEORY. It is an | idea that someone came up with to try to describe | observations. According to the tenets of science, | anyone can come up with a theory that they feel | supports a specific group of data. Much of what is | proposed by the theory of evolution is just as | unprovable and unobservable as are those things | claimed by the "theory" of ID. Many will probably | argue that in time we will have the ability to | prove the theory of evolution or test its claims. | That is likely true, but if we are making up | technology to prove our points, I could also claim | that we may also develop the technology to test | things of a spiritual nature. We will then be able | to prove or disprove whether IDs claims are accurate. | | It's too bad that some people feel a need to | marginalize spiritual beliefs in order to | validate their "science". | | Aaron | | > -----Original Message----- | > From: Chuck Hards | > Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 11:59 AM | > To: Utah Astronomy | > Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] science and religion | > | > | > | > | > And while I'm at it, I have to say that I strongly | > resent some creationists and ID proponents | > characterizing rank & file evolutionists as "Godless". | > How dare they? HOW DARE THEY?!! What a terrible, | > gross misjudgment. This reeks of the dark side of fundamentalism. | > | > __________________________________________________ | > Do You Yahoo!? | > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around | > http://mail.yahoo.com | > | > _______________________________________________ | > Utah-Astronomy mailing list | > Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com | > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy | > Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com | > | | _______________________________________________ | Utah-Astronomy mailing list | Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com | http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy | Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com | | ______________________________________________________________________ | This e-mail has been scanned by Cut.Net Managed Email Content Service, using Skeptic(tm) technology powered by MessageLabs. For more information on Cut.Nets Content Service, visit http://www.cut.net | ______________________________________________________________________ | |