Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Date: Thu,  5 Nov 1992 18:41:09 -0500 
From: David O Hunt <bluelobster+@CMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Questions, old and new
	<cexJMc_00VpLM3KkV8@andrew.cmu.edu>
	<8exJsJW00VpO82XUUa@andrew.cmu.edu>
	<wexK8Oy00VIKA0rUlW@andrew.cmu.edu>
	<8exL8x200WCq0YVXNt@andrew.cmu.edu>
	<gexMRXW00VIKM0rXMO@andrew.cmu.edu>
	<AexiJvO00VpL06V1Vn@andrew.cmu.edu>
	<wey0HoO00VIKQ2f35v@andrew.cmu.edu>
	<0eyJ2oi00VpJE701AK@andrew.cmu.edu>
	<seyNVMa00Vol49xmk_@andrew.cmu.edu>

All first-level quotes are from Opie Byler...

Hypothesis, n, a supposition used as a basis from which to draw
conclusions.

Theory, n, supposition put forward to explain something.

Gee, they sound awfully similar to me...so don't go claiming evolution
is a "hypothesis", not a "theory".  Actually, it's a model.  The MECHANISMS
of evolution are theories, ranging from "Survival of the Fittest/Natural
Selection", to Gould's "Punctuated Equilibrium".  Among others.

> Theories are empirically demonstratable (though not necessarily proovable).

Nothing is provable in absolute terms.  General Relativity, one of the models
that describes gravity has been empirically observed, tested, and seen to
work many times.  Ask any reputable physicist if GR is true, they'll say yes.
Well, ask any reputable biologist/paleontologist if evolution is true,
they'll say
yas, despite the fact that neither have been "proven".

> Evolution cannot be tested any where, and it cannot be observed taking place.

Evolution has been tested in the lab - bacteria go through generations so fast
that they make perfect examples.

Evolution, put simply, is the changing of an organis into a new (but similar)
organism that is better suited to match the conditions currently in existence.
So...take a colony of bacteria, put in pennicillin.  Most die, but a few have
some resistance, and these make up the new population that grows.  Presto,
a species of bacteria that has been altered (read: evolved) to meet an
environmental challenge.

Not only have we just thought-tested it, but it can be observed.  Did it in
high school.  There are a myriad of other examples seen in the wild, such as
the pepper vs. black moths in England.

> The only so-called evidence for it is the evolutionists interpretation
of the fossil > record, and geological history, so as to fit their
preconceived notions.

Sure.  And that so-called evidence is remarkable self-consistent.  Consider
an ancient lake bed, which has 25 million sediment layers.  If one interprets
those layers as yearly run-offs (imagine!) then you find 3 different multi-
thousand year cycles that, wonder of wonders, just happen to match the
precession of the pole, the orbit of the sun in the galaxy, and I can't
remember
the third.

> Geological layers are dated based on fossils contained within them. 
Fossils are > dated based upon what geologic layer they are in. 
Fossils' ages are
> determined accoring to the theory of evolutions placement of them in the life
>  line of living creatures.  Which is of course based on their order in
the fossil
> record.  This is an actual summary of my high school Biology and Geology
>  textbooks  gibberish on dating.

There are other methods of dating - such as radioactive dating.  These
techniques have been shown to be remarkably accurate when compared to
items of known age.  And please, Opie, don't bring up the 3500 year-old
living clams...that's been explained.  Various radioactives can yield a variety
of age scales, and all are, wonder of wonders, consistent with known
items.

So fossils aren't just dated by the rock they're in...they're also dated
radioactively.  So's the rock.  According to evolutionary doctrine, simpler
organisms are more primative.  If you go into the fossil layers, you'll find
that as you find older and older rock strata, the fossils get simpler and
simpler.  Gee - you'd think that more complex organisms were evolving
with time, wouldn't you?  But no, it's all a trick of a) God, to test our
faith or, b) Satan, to steal us from God.

As an aside, Opie, is God so vain and insecure he's got to TEST us all the
time?

Back to the facts...intermediate forms have been found between different
species and the time-order is consistent.  DNA comparisons between
species have shown that the known parts of the evolutionary tree hold up
pretty well to splits of that tree.  Advanced evolutionary theory makes
predictions, which on a small scale can be predicted in the lab, or
verified by observation of existing species.

Lastly - science changes, one might say it evolves.  :)  If a theory is
proven wrong, people change their views.  It is quite possible to hear a
scientist say "That's a very good case - I now think that what I believed
was wrong.  The evidence supports your view much better."

I have yet to hear any Creationist scholar say likewise - everything has to
be fit into what the scriptures say.  And if it doesn't, then "...we aren't
interpreting the writings correctly."

And a comment about your high school text - obviously it's been watered
down.

If you really want to be able to "shoot down" evolution, study it.  Major in
biology.  But PLEASE don't keep parroting the same old _disproven_
Creationist comments.  One might be tempted to think you folks can't
learn from mistakes.

David
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic