To: Little Bill
"Lyell stressed that the antiquity of human species was far beyond the accepted theories of that time." I believe this is true today. ...and I'm a catastrophist.
25 posted on
06/04/2003 8:37:15 PM PDT by
blam
To: blam
Darwin and Lyell fed on and reinforced each other, I don't believe in evolution as it is presently defined, nor do I believe in the out of Africa theory, as you well know. Lyell and Darwin are two of the drag anchors holding back reasearch in human origins and dispersal.
27 posted on
06/04/2003 8:49:26 PM PDT by
Little Bill
(No Rats, A.N.S.W.E.R (WWP) is a commie front!!!!,)
To: blam
A catastrophist in the literal sense? Where God periodicaly destroys most life via world wide catastrophy and re-creates new life forms?
Interesting.
Catastrophism went out of favor in the mid 19th century. I've always been fascinated by that theory myself. Strictly speaking, there is NO EVIDENCE for creation just as there is NO EVIDENCE for evolution. Evolution is an excellent theory that would tie many things together and answer many questions, but there is no EVIDENCE. It seems to me there is a stronger argument for catastrophism than for evolution or creation.
Or were you kidding...
37 posted on
06/05/2003 12:50:34 PM PDT by
IYAAYAS
(Live free or die trying)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson