| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"david ford" |
| Date: |
27 Jul 2004 08:49:29 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Evolution At A Snail's Pace |
"Alan Jeffery" <observa_no_spam@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message news:<2mghqqFlpsvvU1@uni-berlin.de>...
"Andrew Shepherd" <andrew@atshep.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:TlzGOEBGvjABFwv7@ntlworld.com...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/conservation/story/0,13369,1268273,00.html
and
http://www.innovations-report.de/html/berichte/biowissenschaften_chemie/b
ericht-30868.html
<snide creationist stupidity>
But they're still just periwinkles. None of them has been seen turning it a
crab.
</snide creationist stupidity>
I'm reminded by "Re: Evolution At A Snail's Pace" of the following
_Paleobiology_ 3: 134 (1977) testimony by G&E:
In fact, most published commentary on punctuated equilibria has
been favorable. We are especially pleased that several
paleontologists now state with pride and biological confidence
a
conclusion that had previously been simply embarrassing ('all
these
years of work and I haven't found any evolution').
.
|
|
| User: "mel turner" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution At A Snail's Pace |
27 Jul 2004 10:01:14 PM |
|
|
In article <b1c67abe.0407271757.15ccff44@posting.google.com>,
dford3@gl.umbc.edu [david ford] wrote...
"Alan Jeffery" <observa_no_spam@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:<2mghqqFlpsvvU1@uni-berlin.de>...
"Andrew Shepherd" <andrew@atshep.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:TlzGOEBGvjABFwv7@ntlworld.com...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/conservation/story/0,13369,1268273,00.html
and
http://www.innovations-report.de/html/berichte/biowissenschaften_chemie/b
ericht-30868.html
<snide creationist stupidity>
But they're still just periwinkles. None of them has been seen turning it a
crab.
</snide creationist stupidity>
A mollusc turning into an arthopod would indeed be dramatic.
I'm reminded by "Re: Evolution At A Snail's Pace" of the following
_Paleobiology_ 3: 134 (1977) testimony by G&E:
In fact, most published commentary on punctuated equilibria has
been favorable. We are especially pleased that several
paleontologists now state with pride and biological confidence
a
conclusion that had previously been simply embarrassing ('all
these
years of work and I haven't found any evolution').
Of course, the only evolution that is "missing" in all these PE-related
quotes [why is creationism so hung up on quote-mining and
quote-mongering? Why don't they have any research of their own to talk
about?] is merely the sort of "but it's still a (whatever)" that many
creationists fully accept and dismiss as just "'microevolution' within
a 'kind'". In fact, they often call for ridiculous amounts of that same
"missing", species-level and below evolution to allow for a recent
radiation of the "kinds" after the Flood.
G&E agree that plenty of higher-level transitional intermediates do
occur in the fossil record, and PE has nothing much to say about them.
cheers
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Vreeland" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution At A Snail's Pace |
28 Jul 2004 10:58:55 PM |
|
|
(mel turner) wrote in message news:<ce75c7$2v0$1@gargoyle.oit.duke.edu>...
why is creationism so hung up on quote-mining and
quote-mongering? Why don't they have any research of their own to talk
about?]
Beause it is the way they read the bible. They look for
out-of-context quotes to prove subtle religious points. It is
scholasticism, which is what the term "dunce" was invented for, from
the venerable (d. 1308) Duns Scotus, whose pedantry knew no bounds.
The catholics still revere Scotus, despite his opposition to St.
Thomas Aquinas. I always thought that it was absurd excesses of
scholastics like Scotus that led to protestantism, but I suppose that
we have now gone full circle. It is a dangerous path, for scholastics
can "prove" anything they have a mind to, despite outward reality
which they have no interest in.
Jack V
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Wilkins" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution At A Snail's Pace |
29 Jul 2004 07:57:37 AM |
|
|
John Vreeland <Vreejack@hotmail.com> wrote:
mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu (mel turner) wrote...
why is creationism so hung up on quote-mining and
quote-mongering? Why don't they have any research of their own to talk
about?]
Beause it is the way they read the bible. They look for
out-of-context quotes to prove subtle religious points. It is
scholasticism, which is what the term "dunce" was invented for, from
the venerable (d. 1308) Duns Scotus, whose pedantry knew no bounds.
The catholics still revere Scotus, despite his opposition to St.
Thomas Aquinas. I always thought that it was absurd excesses of
scholastics like Scotus that led to protestantism, but I suppose that
we have now gone full circle. It is a dangerous path, for scholastics
can "prove" anything they have a mind to, despite outward reality
which they have no interest in.
I think that the scholastics are much maligned due to the treatment of
the Enlightenment. They were, in fact, honest and subtle thinkers, for
the most part. And what is one person's pedantry is another's careful
reflection.
--
John Wilkins
john_SPAM@wilkins.id.au http://wilkins.id.au
"Men mark it when they hit, but do not mark it when they miss"
- Francis Bacon
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
