I would like some example of scientifically tested evolutionary theory. There are a lot of inferences but no one I know has been able to evolve species on a macro level. Some work with viruses and micro evolution but everything on a macro scale is indemonstrable to date. Evolution is really a historical theory based on the fossil record and current species now in existence. It is a long line of inferences. You may not be aware but Darwin's work with finches was called into question during the 1980's when it was found all the finches can still interbred and the "mongrel" finches were much healthy than the isolated "species". Similar to dog breeds. -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Scott Catron Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 1:04 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] science and religion Please cite a journal article where one tenant of the theory of creationism has been scientifically tested and published. --- "Lambert, Aaron" <Aaron.Lambert@Williams.com> wrote:
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.
_______________________________________________ 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