Re: Stereotypes and reputations

    George says,
>There is controversy among evolutionary scientists about some aspects of
>evolutionary theory. But there is no real scientific controversy about
>evolution itself.

    Whether there SHOULD be "no real scientific controversy" depends on how
"evolution" is defined. A word overpopulated with meanings, "biological
evolution" is used to mean:
    a micro-E change in the gene pool of a population,
    evolutionary fossil progressions in geological contexts,
    full common descent among biological organisms,
    totally natural development (which I'll call Total Macro-E) of all
biological complexity.

    How convincing is the evidence for each type of E?
    no scientists (including yeCs) disagree with micro-E;
    yeCs (but not oeCs) disagree with basic fossil progressions;
    some oeCs disagree with full common descent, but I think the evidence
for it is strong.
    But are there no reasons -- none at all? -- to wonder about Total Macro-E?

Craig
Received on Sat Jul 30 10:49:56 2005