To: Ethan Clive Osgoode
Why? Theories, unlike religion, change with new evidence. More recent material can be considered more relevant that earlier material for that reason. Honestly, even going back to 1989 may be too ancient for a science (biology) which updates itself every day. Mind you, no definition of the theory of evolution accepted nowadays mentions life coming from non-life, and none of them jibe at all with biblical creationism.
202 posted on
02/12/2003 9:55:48 AM PST by
Junior
(The New World Order stole your tag line)
To: Junior
Why? You said:
Since the quote I pulled is dated 1989, and the one you pulled is dated 1988, one could make the point that your quote is outdated in light of new evidence.
So what is this "new evidence" that must have come up between 1988 and 1989 which makes Mayr "outdated"? Or are you only relating to me a fantasy of yours?
To: Junior
Theories, unlike religion, change with new evidence. False. When theories are disproven by new evidence they are thrown out and the discoverer of the replacement usually has his name put on the new theory. Evolution is not a theory, it is a materialist ideology.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson