Deny the Designer, Save "Science"

http://www.spectator.org ^ | 1/23/2006 12:06:59 AM | P. David Hornik

[Hunble]

"The issue is not whether organisms change, it's obvious that, "life forms on Earth have changed over time". The issue is whether or not natural selection can explain all of the diversity of organisms that we see on this earth."

On that, you and I are in full agreement. Evolution is a statement of fact, but exactly how it happens will always remain open for debate. This is what research, knowledge and understand in all about. Step by step, we fill in the blanks and learn the details of how it works.

As I have stated many times over the years, I have no problems with the concepts of Intelligent Design or Natural Selection, as long as they both address how it operates.

Actually, I have stated the case correctly, since many Freepers refuse to admit that life forms have altered over time. For people such as yourself, that factual information is understood and you have an understanding of the term "evolution."

If I have said anything that would offend you; that was not my intention. I simply desire to learn how things work. The why is based upon our faith in God and we probably both agree on that aspect.

[Hunble]

For example, many years ago it was much discussed that finding a "living fossil" would be a way to falsify evolution.

Please explain this strange concept. I have absolute no idea why this could possible contradict the concept of life forms changing over time.

New fish have developed over time, and the Coelacanth has survived extinction (barely) in it's ecological adaptation.

The fact that the Coelacanth is extremely rare, is a good example of why new fish have become better adapted for today's environment. What was so surprising, is that it had survived so long!

[webstersII]

I agree with your comments that we are trying to understand HOW it works. I would also add we are trying to understand to what degree it works.

As I stated, the only real issue is whether or not there was enough time, and possibly other factors, to have caused the amount of diversity we see from simple up through the complex organisms. I personally do not believe that there is sufficient evidence to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that evolutionary processes are responsible for all of the organisms we see around us.

[Junior]

Evolution is tested every time a new genome is sequenced or a new fossil species is discovered.

I've never heard of a "living fossil" possibly falsifying evolution. Indeed, evolution doesn't say anything about the duration of species, but only that populations change over time in response to environmental pressures. Methinks you either misremembered the statement, or that the statement came from a creationist website -- the latter are notorious for making stuff up from whole cloth.

Finally note, the two modern species of coelacanth are not identical to the species found in the fossil record, but are very closely related.