Replies

To: Dimensio

As I see it, evolution is an ideological doctrine. If it were only a "scientific theory", it would have died a natural death 50 - 70 years ago; the evidence against it is too overwhelming and has been all along. The people defending it are doing so because they do not like the alternatives to an atheistic basis for science and do not like the logical implications of abandoning their atheistic paradigm and, in conducting themselves that way, they have achieved a degree of immunity to what most people call logic.

488 posted on 7/29/02 5:18 AM Pacific by medved

You mention logical implications. Here is my logic:
-Offspring tend to resemble parents, tend to have similar features. I think we can agree on that.
-When an animal has a feature that allows it to live a healthier life, it is able to live longer and produce more offspring. We should all be able to agree with this.
-Therefore when an animal has a desirable trait it will pass that trait on to more offspring than another animal without that trait would.
-Those offspring would then pass that trait on to their offspring and so forth and the entire population would eventually gain that trait.

This is evolution. How do you refute these logical assertions?

(This post is from berkeleybeej's son. I apologize for not having my own screen name)