Missing link : “cdesign proponentsists”

From: Pim van Meurs <pimvanmeurs@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon Nov 07 2005 - 22:43:47 EST

This is too good not to share with ASA

Nick Matzke reports on an analysis of various version of "Pandas" by
Barbara Forrest. Seems that a rare transition form was uncovered called
“cdesign proponentsists”.


You might be interested to read about a very rare transitional fossil
between creationism and “intelligent design”
<http://www2.ncseweb.org/wp/?p=80> that was recently discovered by
Barbara Forrest <http://www.selu.edu/Academics/Depts/HIPS/forrest.html>
during her exploration of some exhibits filed in /Kitzmiller v. Dover/,
namely drafts of the original “intelligent design” book /Of Pandas and

The amazing beast, “*cdesign proponentsists*” was discovered directly
above strata containing the well-known and ubiquitous species
*“creationists”*. Previous research by Forrest
<http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/day6am2.html#day6am889> had dated
the layer the missing link was found in to the latter half of 1987.

Forrest had previously been able to show that “intelligent design”
almost completely replaced “creationism” in 1987, in a dramatic episode
of ecological replacement:


…but, as is often the case in punctuated equilibria between
closely-related species, the transitional form has a small,
geographically localized population, and so is difficult to discover in
the fossil record.

Through painstaking sifting through the record, however, Forrest
eventually found the holy grail: a perfect intermediate.

    /Creation Biology/ (1983), p. 3-34:
    “Evolutionists think the former is correct; *creationists* because
    of all the evidence discussed in this book, conclude the latter is

    /Biology and Creation/ (1986), p. 3-33:
    “Evolutionists think the former is correct, *creationists* accept
    the latter view.”

    /Biology and Origins/ (1987), p. 3-38:
    “Evolutionists think the former is correct, *creationists* accept
    the latter view.”

    /Of Pandas and People/ (1987, creationist version), p. 3-40:
    “Evolutionists think the former is correct, *creationists* accept
    the latter view.”

    /Of Pandas and People/ (1987, “intelligent design” version), p. 3-41:
    “Evolutionists think the former is correct, *cdesign proponentsists*
    accept the latter view.”

Both creationists and Intelligent Design proponents were quick to point
out that the discovery had created two new gaps between the two movements.
Received on Mon Nov 7 22:45:42 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Nov 07 2005 - 22:45:42 EST