Re: unsupported assertion about evolution

Nick Nicholas (
Tue, 06 Aug 1996 02:29:38 -0400

At 10:02 PM 8/2/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Nick Nicholas (whoever he is) writes:
>> Darwinian evolution has been discredited, do your reading
>I'm quoting this exactly as written; it appears that Mr. Nicholas hasn't
>heard about putting periods at the end of sentences. It also appears that
>we have been invaded by creationists.
>Nick, in a scientific/philosopical forum such as this one, it is customary
>to give reasons for one's assertions. So if you have something to say,


My absurd assertion was to get you and Jamesck tp come up from the
depth for a real discussion of Darwinian Evolution.

The (totaly absurd staement) was made to rouse the powers from the
depths. Actually I was hoping for a lot more folks to tell me off.

The real matter I want to bring up is whether or not Darwanian Ev.
can account for extant species.

1. Darwanisn is conservative in the extreme. It favors the production of
organisma who are well adapted to the environment of the parent organism(s)
prior to the point of "conception" or whatever reproduction is fashionable
among that species. It is crtainly not proactive.

2. There remain questions about the billion wears form the forst organoc
molecules untit th development of relativelt complex single celled organisms
and the development of "interchangable parts" in DNA based organisms. <
just had an epileptic seizure and can't complete for a bit, bear
with mee for a bit, I just trying to get real participants to "rise to the bait"

back soon