>Frankly, I have seen the misconception that the above questions seeks to
>dispel more often believed by creationists than by evolutionists. Concerning
>the complexity issue, for example, Vardiman says in ICR Impact #162 that
>"...evolution is supposed to be open-ended, continuing indefinitely its
>growth in order". Likewise Henry Morris, who writes in ICR Impact #141 that
>"...evolution is supposed to be a universal law of increasing complexity." I
>don't know how many times I have heard creationists contrast the biblical
>notion of The Fall, or even the laws of thermodynamics, with the claim that
>evolution requires "constant improvement towards perfection". Certainly there
>are some in the evolution camp who mistakenly believe that evolution is some
>inexorable process of increasing complexity and greater perfection, but I
>have almost invariably heard this false notion used by creationists to
>discredit evolution.
Now this sounds like an evolution I could believe in! If evolution "does
not move toward a more perfect state nor even toward greater complexity",
then it must either do nothing, or move toward a less perfect state and
toward lesser complexity. I could buy into that.