On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Don Winterstein wrote:
> Loren Haarsma wrote:
>> "... Once an understanding of DNA was developed several decades later,
>> a new and independent way of testing evolutionary theory became
>> possible...."
>
> Such tests are fine for those who already accept the validity of
> evolutionary theory, but for those who don't, the tests at best only
> reveal how organisms are genetically related....
>
> Far more compelling predictions can be made about relationships among
> fossils, as I pointed out previously.
Yes, I'm not claiming that DNA evidence will convince skeptics. I'm
only saying that it's exactly the sort of testable scientific prediction
which some folks say that historical sciences can't make.
You're right, the existence and relationships of increasing numbers of
transitional fossils pose real difficulties for special-creationist
models. But I think that genetic homologies of non-coding DNA regions,
and in particular the existence and pattern of pseudogenes in various
species, pose equal difficulties for those models.
Loren Haarsma
Received on Sat Dec 18 15:29:36 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Dec 18 2004 - 15:29:37 EST