Re: Debate with Moorad

Glenn R. Morton (grmorton@waymark.net)
Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:00:10 -0600

At 12:46 PM 10/29/98 -0700, John W Burgeson wrote:
>Glenn wrote:
>
>"And if the only natural explanation were observationally false, it would
>leave only a creationistic alternative."
>
>Here is the crux of the matter, Glenn.
>
>I cannot think of such a situation. No matter how bizarre the physical
>circumstances, how can one declare any natural explanation to be "only?"
>Or even any set of natural explanations?
>
>Give me an example situation where I'm wrong, Glenn. I can think of none.

Evolution itself. It is the only naturalistic explanation for the origin
of life, if not on this world, then on some other world and we were seeded
here.

If evolution is not the only naturalistic explanation for the origin of
life, then tell us what is the naturalistic alternative to the evolutionary
origin and development of life?

If all living animals were to be found as fossils at the
Cambrian/Precambrian boundary, there would be NO evolution.
glenn

Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm