Re: [asa] Fossil Discovery Is Heralded

From: John Burgeson (ASA member) <hossradbourne@gmail.com>
Date: Wed May 27 2009 - 10:20:28 EDT

Isn't the REAL question here "What discovery or experiment could
falsify the fact of evolution." Or perhaps, "could falsify the fact of
common descent?"

Perhaps there is nothing which could, even hypothetically, do so.
Unlike Newton's laws, it is such an elastic theory. Perhaps it has to
be that way.

On 5/26/09, David Campbell <pleuronaia@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Now if the fossil had been found in 10000 year old glacial till or in the
>>> Cambrian then "evolution" would be wrong
>
> If it was found in younger deposits, that's no problem-forms retaining
> ancestral conditions can survive after new types arise. There might
> be a problem if a very good fossil record only showed the supposed
> ancestor more recent than some of the supposed descendants, but
> primates have a bad habit of living in trees and falling apart after
> death instead of burrowing into the bottom of shallow oceans and
> having only one or two shells, a much better way to have a good fossil
> record.
>
> A mammal turning up in the Cambrian would be problematic for
> evolution. Although it would not prove that everything else didn't
> evolve, we might start speculating about a lost alien pet or the like
> in the particular case (or misdated rocks, like the "Carboniferous"
> Physa snail that turned out to be Cretaceous.)
>
> --
> Dr. David Campbell
> 425 Scientific Collections
> University of Alabama
> "I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

-- 
Burgy
www.burgy.50megs.com
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed May 27 10:21:01 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed May 27 2009 - 10:21:01 EDT