|
|
|||
|
|
Page 2
What about Creationism ? Does it make any predictions ? Yes, it can be said to make predictions. For instance, it predicts that "macroevolution" is impossible - that a species cannot evolve into another species. Yet there are hundreds of experiments where speciation has been observed (for a list of references, see "Observed Instances of Speciation"). Some Creationists would object that no "kind" has ever changed into another". We will talk about this in the next question.
3. What is the physical evidence that species cannot evolve beyond "kinds" ? One prediction made by most Creationists is either that species cannot evolve into another species, or from "kind" to "kind". Now here we have a problem already, since the notion of "kind" is not defined by Creationists. Some claim that a "kind" is identified visually. For instance, all "dogs" are a "kind". However, it is unclear why "terriers" or "mammals", for instance, are not kinds instead of "dogs". At any rate, this question applies to all Creationists. If there is such a barrier to the progress of evolution, then where is it in the DNA ? Where is this barrier and how is it expressed in the DNA ? If somehow DNA could not change beyond a certain limit, then we should see this somewhere. Why is all DNA the same, and does not seem to have any such barrier at all ? Neo-Darwinism is clear on the question : all adaptation proceeds from the same mechanisms. Speciation or "kind-to-kind" is no different from adaptation within a species or "kind", just more extensive. And the proof is, as they say, in the pudding : the transitional forms we observe in the fossil record are smooth gradations, thus showing the beauty and power of the processes of evolution. In the second part, I will address the four remaining questions, and also dispel a common myth about evolution.
Go To Page: 1 2
For a complete listing of article comments, questions, and other discussions related to Francois Tremblay's Atheism topic, please visit the Discussions page. |
||
|
|
|||