Trust in the LORD with all your heart,
and do not rely on your own insight.. Pr. 3:5
Ron Chitwood
chitw@flash.net
----------
> From: Ed Brayton <cynic@net-link.net>
> To: Ron Chitwood <chitw@flash.net>
> Cc: EVOLUTION@calvin.edu; Glenn R. Morton <grmorton@waymark.net>
> Subject: Re: Glenn wrote:
> Date: Monday, June 01, 1998 10:06 PM
>
> Ron Chitwood wrote:
> >
> > >>>>Actually I agree here. It is PRECISELY like what the medieval's
did.
> > But
> > they didn't assume geocentrism either. The ancient peoples looked at
the
> > evidence before their eyes and saw the sun moving. They didn't feel
their
> > own motion so they believed that they were stationary. When they moved
in
> > a cart, they felt motion, jerks and stops etc. Since there was none of
> > that when planted on the ground, they used this observational data to
draw
> > the conclusion they did. it was quite reasonable<<<
> >
> > Really, all I am asking is that you take it one step further and
realize
> > that the sun is setting on macroevolution because of more current
findings
> > in microbiology, mathematics, etc. Why do you suppose PC or the
'hopeful
> > monster' idea has been proposed? Its because the data that has been
> > accumulated earlier is proving to be an inadequate answer.
>
> Sorry, Ron, but the "hopeful monster" idea was proposed half a century
> ago. It was, and is, rejected by mainstream genetics. I am assuming that
> you meant PE (punctuated equilibrium) when you said PC, but anyone who
> has read the work of PE theorists like Gould and Eldredge knows that
> they reject Goldschmidt's saltationism. The "hopeful monster" is a long
> forgotten bit of nonsense from an otherwise respected geneticist. It is
> only relevant to demagogues who are banking on the fact that their
> audience doesn't know anything about the history of evolutionary
> thought.
>
> Ed