"If a new creature would come along it would not last."  Can people
who have no idea what they are talking about keep their astonishing
ignorance to themselves.

        Dissent with modification may not be a perfect descriptor of the
biological process that governs speciation on our planet.  In the same
light, the theory of gravitation does not perfectly describe the attraction
of objects (i.e. at the extremely micro level).  But both of these theories
are exceedingly accurate across the majority of observable circumstances and
provide the best current explanation of natural phenomena.

        The stupifyingly inane comment that new species would be less
successful is certainly the product of an unevolved mind.  Species only
adapt in response to changes in their environment. (This is why sharks have
not undergone significant evolution in recent eons while moths in great
Britain evolved within several decades, the example of which the author of
aforementioned inanity is apparently unaware).  Since conditions on Earth
are not static, individuals with genetic differences from others of their
species may have adaptive features that will make them more successful than
their counterparts in relation to new altered conditions.  To sum, some new
creatures last, some don't.  Just ask the dinosaurs.

        Additionally, those familiar with fractal geometry know that the
universe is uniformly complex.  This does not point to the hand of a
creator.  Nor to the contrary.  Nothing inherent in the structure of  the
universe gives a clear message of any source of creation.

        If you choose to believe in creationism over evolution, fine.  Just
don't justify it with obvious falsehood and ridiculous logic.



-----Original Message-----
From: John Martinson [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 3:48 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Creationism v. Evolution


There is no proven fact that a frog turns into an eagle or a snake into a
sheep
and so forth.  I have read no books or research reports going back in time
to
show one such animal or life form ever evolving into another.  Yes, certain
species have "adapted"
to their environment but not have "changed" into another "new" species.
Each
are unique.   In fact Darwinism goes against itself (in my humble opinion)
since in the process of survival of the fit.....the fit wins!!  If a new
creature would come along it would
not last.  Then for two like objects to arise from the swamp gas at the same
time to mate, produce offspring..and go on to multiply and replenish the
earth..is impossible.   The evolution of the eye and sight?  Yes, there are
those who say it would be impossible for that process to happen through the
evolutionary process.  The organization, the structure of the
universe...also
points to a clear message of a possible creator.

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).