Robin Mandell (email@example.com)
Sun, 20 Dec 1998 16:23:54 -0600
At , you wrote:
>At 03:33 PM 12/20/98 -0600, you wrote:
>>To me, as a Christian, I found the the idea of an unbroken chain of life
>>from simple to man limiting the sustaining power of God who can choose to
>>break this continuity when a higher purpose can be served such as the
>>Virgin Birth of Christ and His resurrection. As a biologist and a student
>>of philosophy and theology, I understand that the worldview of the
>>biologist shapes his/her interpretation of biological evidence. The
>>mechanism of natural selection which explains variations and speciationw
>>was taken by Darwin to justify his belief of Common Descent versus the
>>alternative of Common Descent. Most biologists have come to the
>>realization that natural selection fails to account for macroevolution.
>>Some of us believe a time for paradigmatic shift may be at hand and the
>>model of Intelligent Design, if it is allowed to be develop, may become a
>>competing worldview to guide future biological research.
Actually I don't have a commitment to an unbroken chain but I am willing
to let it
live until we know better one way or the other. When you say "most
biologists" how can you define that as I would be surprised but interested
if that was true. Also some on this list speak as if Macroevolution was an
undefined term or false line? Can it really be laid out as a solid line
that can or can not be crossed "naturally"?