> And how can one hypothesize the large-scale changes in form,
> structure and function which have led to the observable
> development of new species without either accepting a
> Darwinist gradualism or a multitude of special creations?
At http://www.noevalley.com/segment/tablecon.htm I have an
hypothesis about the sudden origin of the vertebrates which
you might find interesting.
'Formation' seems to me a good term. It doesn't necessarily
imply an external creator, nor does it carry the baggage of
'evolution'. 'Formation' seems more general, more capable of
encompassing the Cambrian explosion, in contrast to 'evolution',
which has become associated with a school of thought that has
shrunk from explaining the Cambrian phenomenon.
> Is it possible to imagine some way that formative forces
> could work which would allow for dramatic changes (we have
> a living example, surely, in the transformation of a
> caterpillar into a butterfly - through an intermediate
> stage of complete chaos)?
All life is miraculous, but I wouldn't make too much of
insect metamorphoses. Insect moulting is not just the
shedding of a skin, it's more like the emergence of a new
organism within the old one. Successive moults can differ
in the form and number of segments; the transformation you
refer to is an extreme example of this. It is noteworthy
that successive insect moults follow the evolutionary pattern
of reduction in number of segments and distortion of those
that remain.
Cliff Lundberg
San Francisco