RE: [asa] Is evolution a fact? (Dawkins style)

When I first asked "Is evolution a fact," by "evolution" I meant the
evolution of everything- from the big bang, to elements, to planets, to
animals, to people.

After reading responses, I guess some people think of "evolution" as
only "biological evolution," maybe not even involving origin of life
issues.

I'm pretty sure Dawkins says things like "evolution is a fact" and I
assumed he was referring to total evolution, from big bang to humans.

My main question is really "Would you agree with Dawkins that evolution
is a fact" and that would imply the definition of 'evolution' as Dawkins
uses it, whatever that is. I think Dawkins usually refers to 'complete
evolution' (big bang to humans), not just 'biological evolution,' when
referring to 'evolution.'

As far as comparing gaps in evolution with gaps in gravity, with
considering evolution and gravity as facts: I thought that was an
interesting point.

And when I say "fact" I'm referring to a true fact, not what we think is
a fact today and may later get changed (as in geocentricity vs.
heliocentricity 'facts').

,,,Bernie

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Collin Brendemuehl
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 6:33 AM
To: ASA
Subject: RE: [asa] Is evolution a fact?

Evolutionists are actually mixed on this.

Ernst Mayr says that evolution would like to answer the question but at
this time has no good theory.

-- in "What Evolution Is"

----- Original Message -----

(Evolution whether theory or fact says nothing about the origin of life
but addresses only changes in organisms.)

Don

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed May 28 12:18:14 2008