Hey, I didn't write the question! You tell me!
>
>Because of the following, I will assume that you meant this as no more than
>a bit of light humor:
>
>1. You made no distinction between 1) the net effect of "evolution" as an
>ensemble of diverse processes and events, and 2) the outcome of individual
>events within an evolutionary context.
>
>2. You seemed also to treat "evolutionary theory" as if it were some single
>monolithic statement that could be subjected to simple little questions
>like, "So just what does evolutionary theory recognize that evolution does,
>anyway?"
>
>As humor, this is harmless, I suppose, but not particularly funny. If not
>meant to be humor......
You are correct, it is anything but funny. I have been around long enough
to see this complete reversal in what evolution purports to be saying. How
many sound scientific theories could weather that with a straight face? It
is evolution as a theory that is the joke. Tell me about the most oft
cited example of evolution in action in every textbook of biology in
America, the peppered moth, that now is going to have to be red-facedly
removed from the textbooks. How long can biologists continue to hail as
supreme a throry that can't even get the primal story right? And that when
the truth about the problems with the peppered moths were known to many
insiders for thirty years or more.
Art
http://biology.swau.edu