[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Evolution vs. Creationism

Bob Dixon wrote "How else would a proboscis that sucks 
blood from vertebrates come into existence through slow 
gradual changes? Think about it really hard, and with an 
open mind. I think you will realize the foolishness of such concept."

The eye, a (better) example with Creationists, has evolved not once, 
but numerous times, separately. Can't have half an eye, you say? 
Rubbish. A nearly blind "eye", a few photosensitive cells that merely 
detect light/no light is still a big edge over total blindness. 
A mutation that has a cell layer on top protecting these cells or 
focusing the light even minimally is even better. Adaptations can 
also evolve for one purpose (feathers for warmth) and then come
in handy for another (gliding) and .. you get the picture.

Rather than branding scientific thought as "foolish" you could read
"Darwin's Dangerous Idea: A Darwinian View of Life" by Daniel 
Dennett or "River out of Eden" by Richard Dawkins. 

If we did science by anecdotal evidence we would need 
Astrology, and The Paranormal after Physics class. God forbid!