>> If Yockey believes that "the origin of life...could not have happened
>> by chance" then he is not a "Darwinist" in my book. Once it is
>> admitted that the "origin of life" did not happen by "chance", then
>> there is no justification for believe that it was "evolution" that
>> "began after the origin of life".
Got to disagree here, the question of how the first life arose is
separate from the question of whether it evolved after that. There is
nothing inconsistent with saying that God created the first life, but
that it evolved subsequently (with or without further intervention).
Darwin did not say that life had to have arisen by chance; he seems to
have been deliberately vague on the question:
"There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several
powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into
one; ..."
That is certainly compatible with a supernatural origin of life. Was
Darwin also not a Darwinist in your book?
-- Jim Foley Symbios Logic, Fort Collins, COJim.Foley@symbios.com (970) 223-5100 x9765 I've got a plan so cunning you could put a tail on it and call it a weasel. -- Edmund Blackadder