From: utidjian@remarque.berkeley.edu (David M.V. Utidjian)
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Darwin's Enigma
Date: 16 Apr 92 03:37:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: agate.sisp2INN1oh
Organization: Processed People for a Processed America
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <0ebs02b=cd5v00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> jloucks@uts.amdahl.com (Jim Loucks) writes:
>lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay) writes:
>
>
	[stuff deleted about honesty of scientists]

>
>I can repost my article giving the names of those on the transcipts 
>if you wish.

	Please do.... I seem to have lost the article.

>>Punctuated-equilibrium is only a small variation on the current
>>theory. Its falsifiability (or lack thereof) doesn't change the 
>>falsifiability of the overall theory. Which is in fine shape.
>>If you don't agree, you might be more specific.
>
>What I meant was, if evolution is a scientific theory, then it must
>be falsifiable from what I've read in talk.origins and elsewhere. 

	This is not an unreasonable question....  If you had read
T.O. for a while you would have seen this discussion.  Your question
has been asked and it has been answered.
What evidence do you think would falsify evolution?

>So, how can the fossil record be disproved if whatever happened can
>be explained via the fossil record. This sounds rather tautologous.

	Ummmm.... I doubt that the fossil record can be disproved.
This is because the fossil record is EVIDENCE not a theory.  The 
fossil record is the kind of historical record that anyone can go
out and investigate.  It is hard evidence, in all meanings of the word
hard.  There are many things in the theory of evolution that can not
be supported by the fossil record.  There are some things that the 
fossil record has no record of.  The fossil record is only part of the
evidence that supports the theory of evolution.

>Punctuated equilbria is evidence supporting a lack of transitional
>fossils, exactly what creationism predicts. I've asked before, what
>determines the difference in the physical evidence, such as the 
>fossil record, for punctuated equilibria and creationism?

	Punctuated equilibrium is not evidence, it is a theory, it
is disputably one of the theories that make up the theory of evolution.
The lack of transitional fossils is the evidence, or rather the lack
of evidence, that the theory of P.E. tries to explain.  The disputable
part of P.E. has to do with how much of speciation occured due to
P.E. of the total amount.

	Jim, I suggest you spend some time looking these things up
for yourself.  Unfortunately that will take some time and quite a
bit of effort on your part.  Also unfortunately... you will have to
study some fairly technical books to answer your questions.  Pop-Sci
books are not allways adequate.  I will go to my public library and
read up on the subject and hopefully I can find some common books
that can answer these questions.  I don't think this is an unreas-
onable suggestion because most of us evo-types have read virtually
all of the creationist stuff.... and keep hearing it over and over
again here on T.O.  

	Jim, you seem to come up with controversial stuff all of the
time that you will hope will support your own point of view.  Do you
ever do some research yourself before you post to T.O.  Have you seen
the video tapes that you mention are available from ICR?  Do the
transcripts that you went to some trouble and expense to get match 
the tapes?
 
>Jim Loucks           jloucks@uts.amdahl.com 

-Dave-
email: utidjian@remarque.berkeley.edu