ID opponents keeps insisting, "But we don't need design. A naturalistic
explanation *could* exist." True, but would it be science? Science fiction
writers have been dreaming up similar stories for a century now. In fact,
the twentieth century might come to be known as the "science fiction
century". Darwinism, the idea that nature is the result of chance events
molded by natural selection, included some good stories. Such as the one
about how a wolf-like creature turned into a whale in a mere 10 million years.
Some of the changes would have included:
(1) Complete loss of body hair
(2) Transformation of a protruding nose into a blowhole
(3) Migration of the blowhole to the top of the head
(4) Loss of toes/claws/hooves
(5) Forelimbs transforming gradually from wolf-like legs into pectoral fins
(6) Massive increase in body size
(7) Transformation of a wolf-like tail into a powerful fluke that propels a
whale through (and out of) the water by vertical undulations
(8) Development of echolocation
(9) Ability of young to nurse under water
(10) Increase in brain size
(11) Near complete loss of hind limbs
(12) etc‰¥Ï (for example, possible modifications to the eye to allow for vision
during continuous exposure to water, baleen for filter feeding - if present
in the first whales, ‰¥Ï)
http://www.arn.org/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000320.html
(See post by DNAunion 9-19-2000)
All of these changes *might* be explained by some implausible "chance events
plus natural selection" scenario. However, any story of how it might have
happened is pure science fiction. When scientists return to actually doing
science, they will seek out the details of biology, micro biology, bio
chemistry etc., which can be verified, and leave everyone to their own
speculations about how it might have happened. I would not try to discourage
those who feel it can all be explained by chance events plus natural
selection. The details of how they do science will remain exactly the same
as scientists who suspect something deeper, such as design. However,
scientists who suspect design probably won't dismiss anything in nature as
"junk".
Bertvan
http://members.aol.com/bertvam
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Sep 20 2000 - 13:42:34 EDT