smorgasbord of explanations

From: John Burgeson (
Date: Sun Aug 27 2000 - 14:20:25 EDT

  • Next message: "Re: Comments/Questions re Phylum level evolution"

    Bob DeHaan wrote: "The objection to all such mechanism
    is that they comprise what Walter Remine
    calls a smorgasbord of explanations, from which one
     selects the one that seems most plausible."

    The first time I encountered the theories of evolution,
    I was struck (not as eloquently as Remaine) by the
    same thought. After nearly 50 years of
    studying the issues, I am still unconvinced that the concept usually called
    "macro-evolution" has any real basis in reality. I know -- this is
    an argument from "personal incredulity." To which accusation I plead
    guily as charged, and respond only that my opposer must argue
    on the basis of "personal credulity."

    "Just so" stories are fun to read, and useful for creating a structure
    upon which facts of the world can be constructed. But they remain
    just that -- a structure, a model, nothing more.

    To those who inhabit this list and claim the TE position, I stand in
    awe (at least sometimes) of your intellect and power of argumentation.
    What I say here is simply this -- you, and others, have failed
    to convince me that the TE position is "true." That it is useful -- that
    it can be defended from scripture -- that it is held by honorable
    scholars much more learned than I -- I do not dispute. But I cannot
    claim the position for myself.

    Just 2c worth if anybody cares.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 27 2000 - 14:22:14 EDT