Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (93867)	1/18/2005 9:18:15 AM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

"Do you not know that the word "theory" in science does not mean that it is just some sort of a whim or idea?" Except when it means EXACTLY that. Message 20957779

To: Grainne who wrote (93867)	1/18/2005 10:48:24 AM
From: J. C. Dithers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

You are indeed late to this discussion, and apparently misinformed as a result. If you believe me to be a "Creationist" who accepts the Bible literally, it is not because I ever said as much, and I am not. You must have missed the post in which I pointed out the the Catholic Church accepts the tenets of most all of modern science, including the evolutionary process. The problem with the "Theory of Evolution," or "Darwinism," is the contradictions found in the fossil evidence. Darwin himself acknowledged that transitional species must have existed at all times in abundance and that a proliferation of examples would eventually be found. They have not been, and indeed, "...Although paleontologists have, and continue to claim to have, discovered sequences of fossils that do indeed present a picture of gradual change over time, the truth of the matter is that we are still in the dark about the origin of most major groups of organisms. They appear in the fossil record as Athena did from the head of Zeus-full-blown and raring to go, in contradiction to Darwin's depiction of evolution as resulting from the gradual accumulation of countless infinitesimally minute variations, which, in turn, demands that the fossil record preserve an unbroken chain of transitional forms." These crucial anomalies are a matter for scientists to debate and work out for themselves. In the meantime, the issue remains as to how evolution should be taught in the schools. I am one who believes that the glaring gaps in the theory need to be presented, if not emphasized, and that alternative explanations of the origins and development of life should be presented as well. I must say that it is tiresome to respond to posts from latecomers to a discussion, necessitating revisiting arguments already made at length. I do not "ignore" (cogent) posts to me, but don't in all cases reply to ones which make only assertions and do not pose questions to me.