I think you may have Michael Behe in mind rather than Wells. Behe does
accept common descent but objects to natural selection as the primary
mechanism.
On page 5 of Icons of Evolution, Wells writes as follows:
"Like change over time, descent with modification within a species is
utterly uncontroversial. But Darwinian evolution claims much more. In
particular, it claims that descent with modification explains the origin and
diversification of all living things.
The only way anyone can determine whether this claim is true is by
comparing it with observations or experiments. Like all other scientific
theories, Darwinian evolution must be continually compared with the
evidence. If it does not fit the evidence, it must be reevaluated or
abandoned - otherwise it is not science, but myth."
The equivocations on the term "darwinian" in this passage are similar to
those of Phillip Johnson. Both Johnson and Wells try to turn objections to
extreme reliance upon natural selection as a mechanism for common descent
into a refutation of common descent.
At any rate, unless I'm mistaken, Wells rejects common descent as well as
extreme neo-darwinism. But I would be happy to learn otherwise.
Jim Hofmann
Philosophy Department and Liberal Studies Program
California State University Fullerton
http://nsmserver2.fullerton.edu/departments/chemistry/evolution_creation/web
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Ikeda
To: asa@calvin.edu
Sent: 5/16/2001 8:34 PM
Subject: Re: Johnson and "Icons"
>Jim Hoffman asked:
>>Does anyone mind if I forward this exchange to Michael
>>Richardson to see if he would like to comment?
Paul Nelson
>Fine with me. It should be pointed out that Richardson remains
>convinced of the common descent of the vertebrates (and the animals
>generally, I suppose). Wells, of course, has never claimed that
>Richardson thought otherwise.
Perhaps I've heard wrong, but I thought that Wells also supports
common descent (although he disputes Darwinian mechanisms).
Regards,
Tim Ikeda (tikeda@sprintmail.com)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 17 2001 - 00:56:39 EDT