Re: Transitional fossils 1/3 (was Latest on Mars)

Stephen Jones (sejones@ibm.net)
Thu, 05 Sep 96 20:37:27 +0800

Group

On Wed, 28 Aug 1996 21:09:09, Glenn Morton wrote:

GM>While I have never seen you change your mind on anything

The purpose of little ad-hominems from Glenn is presumably to
discredit me in the eyes of other Reflectorites, so that they take no
notice of my arguments and/or to knock me off balance so that I get
distracted from answering Glenn's arguments? :-)

As to the truth of Glenn's claim that he has never seen me change my
mind on anything, I will let Reflectorites judge for themselves.
When I first joined the Reflector in early 1995 I denied common
ancestry, but because of arguments mainly from Terry and Glenn, I
changed my mind and I now accept it. Here is the evidence of that
major change of mind. On 28 Jun 95 I sent to the Reflector Cc:
Terry Gray and Glenn Morton, Subject: Re: Clarification of my
Progressive Creationist position:

------------------------------------------------------------
All

ABSTRACT: This post is over 100 lines long. It represents a shift
in my position to a more consistent Progressive Creationist position.
I discuss important evidence supporting the reptilian jawbones-
mammalian earbones transition from Gould's "Eight Little Piggies". I
now accept this transition as fact, although I do not accept it
happened by a 100% natural process.

[...]
------------------------------------------------------------

On the same day I received a reply from Glenn Morton, Subject: Re:
Clarification of my Progress, In-Reply-To: The letter of Wednesday,
28 June 1995... :

------------------------------------------------------------
I am truly humbled by your thanks. I know exactly how difficult a
paradigm shift like that is. Maybe someday, I can convince you that
my view does not in the least depend on naturalism, but that is for
another day.

glenn
------------------------------------------------------------

I neither seek nor need an apology from Glenn for his claim that "I
have never seen you change your mind on anything", since everyone
makes mistakes, even Texans! :-) But before Glenn makes any more
sweeping claims about what I have or have not said in the past, I
should warn him that I have a copy of *every* message I have ever
sent since I joined the Reflector! :-)

GM>I will lay out once again the evidence for the transitional forms
>between fish and amphibian. I do not intend to get into a debate
>with you about this since it probably would serve no purpose and I
>don't have the time right now. I am doing other things.

Is this really *Glenn*, who does "not intend to get into a debate" on
a point which he started? :-)

GM>By the way, I noticed that you didn't tell me one fact which would
>disprove the 2-Adam theory. Is there any fact which would disprove
>that view?

Is Glenn trying to distract attention from his "evidence for the
transitional forms between fish and amphibian"? :-) In one breath he
claims he doesn't "have the time right now" to "get into a debate"
with me regarding "transitional forms between fish and amphibians"
yet he apparently has the time to bring in a red-herring about the
"2-Adam theory"!

I have already answered this several times these last 2 years, the
most recent being once privately to Glenn (which I have asked him to
make public), and a second near-identical public post in this
session. Briefly, the Two-"Adam" *Model* (not theory), is a
high-level conceptual framework which seeks to relate: 1. the
Biblical evidence in Genesis 2-11 for a recent Adam, with 2. the
scientific evdience for a recent emergence of Homo sapiens in the
Middle East. It would be disproved if either 1. or 2. can be shown
to be Biblically or scientifically untenable. Indeed, Glenn and
other TEs have tried for the past 2 years to "disprove" the
Two-"Adam" Model.

But since we are into counter-attacks, I will (again) paraphrase of
Glenn's words for him to answer:

By the way, I noticed that you didn't tell me one fact which would
disprove the *5.5 million year-old/Homo habilis*-Adam theory? Is
there any fact which would disprove that view? :-)

[continued]

God bless.

Steve

-------------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen E (Steve) Jones ,--_|\ sejones@ibm.net |
| 3 Hawker Avenue / Oz \ Steve.Jones@health.wa.gov.au |
| Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ Phone +61 9 448 7439 (These are |
| Perth, West Australia v my opinions, not my employer's) |
-------------------------------------------------------------------