Re: [asa] Microevolution

From: gordon brown <Gordon.Brown@Colorado.EDU>
Date: Fri Sep 19 2008 - 00:26:18 EDT

Jon,

If you have accurately given the creationists' position, it is indeed
self-contradictory. However I would imagine that they might not think
their position has been accurately characterized. Even when people
contradict themselves in what they say, it is likely that what they really
believe is internally consistent.

I think that the microevolution that creationists believe in does not
include increasing complexity.

Gordon Brown (ASA member)

On Thu, 18 Sep 2008, Jon Tandy wrote:

> It seems that most of those today who are anti-evolution based on a literal
> reading of Genesis are willing to accept "microevolution" (which they define
> as variation within species or possibly change between species, but not at
> higher levels). This morning I thought about several claims, which I think
> are generally held. The first, second and fourth claims are religious, the
> third is scientific (not saying that any of the claims are necessarily
> correct).
>
>
>
> a. If God declared his creation "good" and "finished" in the first two
> chapters of Genesis, then evolution's claims that species can adapt and
> change over time contradicts a literal reading.
>
>
>
> b. God created the various "kinds" and told them to reproduce "after their
> kind", which is taken to mean that there can't be change between species.
> They continue to reproduce according to how God created them originally.
>
>
>
> c. All mutations are detrimental.
>
>
>
> d. Evolution of humans from apes and other animals with common traits as
> humans puts humans on the level of animal, and nullifies the special of
> humans who were made "in the image of God".
>
>
>
>
>
> However, given that microevolution is accepted by creationists, what does
> microevolution entail?
>
>
>
> 1. Species can mutate from their originally created "good" condition. This
> means that the creation was not "finished" in Genesis 2, but continues to
> adapt and develop over time.
>
> 2. Natural selection along with mutation can be observed to cause species to
> develop in beneficial ways for their perpetuation, which means that natural
> selection must be accepted by anti-evolutionists as a viable mechanism for
> positive change within or between species.
>
> 3. This means that not all mutations are necessarily detrimental or "bad".
>
> 4. If a given species can change over time so that it produces entirely
> different "kinds" of entities, to me this undercuts the whole idea of
> animals always necessarily reproducing "after their kind" (meaning within
> the same originally created "kind").
>
> 5. Just as humans share common, apparently inherited characteristics with
> other animals, humans are also made of the same atoms and chemicals as all
> the rest of creation. If chemistry and particle physics don't contradict
> the special "image of God" nature of humanity, then why should common
> biological elements be considered any differently?
>
>
>
> Thus, acceptance of microevolution (which is tacitly acknowledged by most
> creationists) requires acceptance of the possibility of beneficial mutations
> and natural selection and fundamental change from God's originally created
> "kinds". Acceptance of the common chemistry within the human species is
> equivalent to the common elements of biology. Thus, all the above arguments
> against macroevolution seem to be contradicted by logical comparison with
> microevolution.
>
>
>
> Does this line of reasoning make sense?
>
>
>
> I realize this still doesn't answer the belief that "kinds" include not only
> species but genus and maybe even family, and some allow for microevolution
> within groups larger than the species. In response it is asserted that the
> creationists' definition of "kind" is ad hoc and inconsistent, meaning
> simply "all the areas in which I don't want to admit the possibility of
> macroevolution."
>
>
>
> And of course another line of evidence is the biological data showing not
> only change between species, but between families, orders, and even phyla.
>
>
>
> Jon Tandy
>
>
>
>
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Sep 19 00:27:09 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Sep 19 2008 - 00:27:10 EDT