>"I now wish to give some reasons why I regard Darwinism as metaphysical,
>and as a research programme. It is metaphysical because it is not
testable.
Neither macro evolution nor Creationism are testable. Macro evolution is
not testable because any test must span many generations. Creationism is
not testable because Creationist theology teaches that God stopped
creating on the 6th day thus any test is ipso facto heretical. Micro
evolution has been observed.
>Thus Darwinism does not really predict the evolution of variety.
Creationism and Darwinism purport to describe historical events. History
is descriptive, not predictive. For example, global warming vs. comming
ice age. Both sides use the same historical data to make opposite
conclusions.
>PD: No, of course not. But the question is would we expect to find any
>intelligent life and I think most biologists would say no.
Seems to me that most Creationists equate evolution with social
Darwinism.
There is no evidence that abstract intelligence makes for biological
fitness. Just the opposite.
________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 12 2000 - 17:48:05 EDT