Hi Everyone!
Though I'm replying to Jerry's message, this first paragraph is for everyone. I didn't trace back in the thread to see where the topic began to drift, but this thread is supposed to be about ID, not about evolution. Discussions about the development of the modern synthesis, early validations of evolutionary theory by the population geneticists and experimental support for evolution should be conducted in the [forum=-5] forum. If someone wants to address these issues there they can find an appropriate thread or start a new one.
Hi Jerry,
Those unfamiliar with evolutionary theory and the history of its development are not only permitted but encouraged to ask questions. If you're raising these issues because you're really unfamiliar with this area then this is fine:
Jerry Don Bauer writes:
Further, your reply is woefully inadequate to address my former accusation that there is no theory of evolution.
...
4) Just honestly admit this has never been done at all. Somebody just suddenly blurted, hey, we gots us a theory of science, everybody else said, 'cool,' and you then began to teach this pseudo-science in our schools when it wasn't even science to begin with.
While you're at it, throw out one paper published in the last 100 years that goes to the effect: 'here is some new evidence for Darwinism.'
But if that's not the case and you're actually familiar with these areas then I'd like to encourage you to take a more constructive approach. Forcing people to start from square one when you already possess a fair amount of familiarity isn't helpful. Knowing the background of the development of evolutionary theory doesn't mean you have to accept it as valid, but feigning ignorance of it just isn't helpful.
| -- | Percy |
| | EvC Forum Director |
™ Version 4.2
