Re: [OT] Darwinism for Bob & Bob
- From: NoSpam@xxxxxxxxxxx (Bob Masta)
- Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 12:58:57 GMT
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 09:28:08 +1200, "Roger Dewhurst"
<dewhurst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Mike" <nomtrxspam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:tsg6f29tnh3a4dr0vi3am85dhbvjq3vonj@xxxxxxxxxx
<nospamplease@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Bob Masta, see my previous post first.
The other Bob, read on.
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 17:36:06 GMT, "Bob Myers"
wrote:out:-
Steven Stanley, an affirmed evolutionist, was objective enough to point
"Mike" <nomtrxspam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
"The known fossil record fails to document a single example of phyletic1979,
evolution accomplishing a major morphologic transition and hence offers no
evidence that a gradualistic model can be valid." Steven M. Stanley,
Macroevolution: Pattern and Process. San Francisco: W. M. Freeman & Co.,
p. 39.
I can think of two off the top of my head. The genus Pelicaria in the upper
Tertiary rocks of the Wairarapa in New Zealand and the evolution of the
pelagic forminifera Orbulina universa.
I'd point to the work of Philip Gingerich showing the evolution of
whales from prior land-dwelling quadrupeds. It's the sort of
"major morphologic transition" that creationists seem to crave.
I haven't heard any of their comments on this work yet.... I wonder
what excuses they will come up with this time?
Best regards,
Bob Masta
dqatechATdaqartaDOTcom
D A Q A R T A
Data AcQuisition And Real-Time Analysis
www.daqarta.com
Home of DaqGen, the FREEWARE signal generator
.
- References:
- [OT] Darwinism for Bob & Bob
- From: Mike
- Re: [OT] Darwinism for Bob & Bob
- From: Roger Dewhurst
- [OT] Darwinism for Bob & Bob
- Prev by Date: Re: amplifier
- Next by Date: Could someone please explain this?
- Previous by thread: Re: [OT] Darwinism for Bob & Bob
- Next by thread: Voice control technologies
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|