RE: [asa] (macroevolution) (was: The term Darwinism)

Hi Ian-

You said:
"you're being self-contradictory here. On one post you concede that the chromosome fusion is a micro-evolutionary step and in this one you claim that it conclusively demonstrates that macroevolution happened. You can't
have it both ways."

Every evolutionary step is a microevolutionary step. If a fusion happened at one point, that is a microevolutionary event. Now when you say "prove macroevolution happened" I would say that the fused chromosome (and thousands of pseudogenes too) are obvious evidence of macroevolution from apelike creature to human. These two DNA things show the path through lifeforms, disproving the idea that man was biologically made unique by 'poofing' things into existence. (The alternative hypothesis to evolution, common descent, is creation by poofing).

Ian said:
" As I have already explained (you didn't seem to listen first time),
the fusion is a NECESSARY condition but it is not a SUFFICIENT
condition. Do you actually understand the difference? "

I understand your point exactly, and I agree. My remark is that it not only doesn't disprove evolution (as we agree), but it also DOES disprove 'creation by poofing' (per OEC/YEC views of biological creation of humans).

Ian said:
" You asked if any creationist had argued that Adam had 48 chromosomes.
With a little googling I was able to find someone making just such a
suggestion in a comments thread on Uncommon Descent. However much
you bang the table about the chromosome fusion somehow conclusively
demonstrating macroevolution, it doesn't and you're going to run into
arguments like this. How do you propose to answer them?"

Any wacko can make a comment on a blog (just look at all mine on this list ;-) and I didn't read it to judge. I was wondering about OEC/YEC LEADERS (Such as Hugh Ross and Ken Ham) and if they would make such a hypothesis. I posit that if they don't, they may have a good reason why they don't (easily disproved, for example).

...Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: Iain Strachan [mailto:igd.strachan@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 3:14 PM
To: Dehler, Bernie
Cc: asa
Subject: Re: [asa] (macroevolution) (was: The term Darwinism)

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Dehler, Bernie<bernie.dehler@intel.com> wrote:
> Dr. Campbell said:
> " There's no magic, hard and fast line, between purportedly "macro"
> and "micro" events.  However, I would note that we may be talking at cross purposes here.
> Your statement could be taken in two ways
> a) I personally want more evidence.
> b) Evolution is wrong because we don't have that evidence.
> b is unreasonable because we do not have the means to produce such evidence."
>
> Specifically this sentence:
> " b is unreasonable because we do not have the means to produce such evidence "
>
> I disagree.  I think the DNA evidence for human evolution (pseudogenes and fused chromosme 2) is all that is needed to demonstrate macroevolution (apelike creature to human).  Dr. Campbell- you don't think this evidence demonstrates, conclusively, that macroevolution happened?

I'll leave David to make his own comment, but you're being
self-contradictory here. On one post you concede that the chromosome
fusion is a micro-evolutionary step and in this one you claim that it
conclusively demonstrates that macroevolution happened. You can't
have it both ways.

As I have already explained (you didn't seem to listen first time),
the fusion is a NECESSARY condition but it is not a SUFFICIENT
condition. Do you actually understand the difference? It is
NECESSARY because if we didn't find it, the theory would be falsified.
 But saying it's not falsified isn't the same as saying it's proven.

You asked if any creationist had argued that Adam had 48 chromosomes.
With a little googling I was able to find someone making just such a
suggestion in a comments thread on Uncommon Descent. However much
you bang the table about the chromosome fusion somehow conclusively
demonstrating macroevolution, it doesn't and you're going to run into
arguments like this. How do you propose to answer them?

Iain

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jul 23 14:01:12 2009