Re: Developmental Evolutionary Biology

Stephen Jones (sjones@iinet.net.au)
Tue, 02 Apr 96 06:16:02 EST

Terry

On Mon, 25 Mar 1996 10:36:04 -0400 you wrote to Art Chadwick:

[...]

TG>A long time ago, I asked this group, when it was composed of
>different people, at what point common ancestry (evolutionary)
>arguments broke down. For example, are all the species of beetles
>descended from a common ancestor? How about all insects? How about
>all arthropods? ... Where do you draw the line and on what basis do
>you draw the line?

I for one could grant you "common ancestry" all the way back to the
first living cell, and indeed back to life's prebiotic "ancestor". So
what? That is *not* the point. Darwinism claims that it knows that
the process that transformed this prebiotic ancestor into a living
cell and from there to a Biology Professor, was an undirected,
purposeless, 100% naturalistic process. Some of us are not satisfied
that they have made their point and are still waiting for experimental
(or other) confirmation of their mechanism(s).

TG>Third, it seems that for some people biology is the only science
>where similar structure, function, mechanism is a sign of an ad hoc
>common design special creationist explanation exclusive of some other
>more unified explanation. As I've said before, if it weren't for a
>Biblical interpretation that demands special creation, the more
>unified explanation embodied in evolutionary ideas would be readily
>accepted. Many of us hear it shouting at us based on the
>evidence--of course, we don't share the Biblical interpretation that
>demands special creation.

I can understand why a non-theist might not "share the Biblical
interpretation that demands special creation." After all, he/she has
no alternative but undirected, purposeless, natural processes. But I
have difficulty understandling why a *theist*,who presumably believes
in a God who will one day raise up from the dust every human being who
has ever lived (Dan 12:2; Jn 6:39; Ac 24:15; Jn 11:24; Rev 20:12-13),
not only does not "share the Biblical interpretation that demands
special creation" but seemingly outrightly rejects it as improbable,
if not impossible? :-)

God bless.

Steve

----------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Jones ,--_|\ sjones@iinet.net.au |
| 3 Hawker Ave / Oz \ http://www.iinet.net.au/~sjones/ |
| Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ phone +61 9 448 7439. (These are |
| Perth, Australia v my opinions, not my employer's) |
----------------------------------------------------------------