Re: ILLogical Evolution

Biochmborg@aol.com
Thu, 26 Aug 1999 10:47:09 EDT

In a message dated 8/26/99 8:16:38 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
chadwicka@swau.edu writes:

> Note also the following fallacy of equivocation in Miller‚s definition of
> Evolution: „evolution: process by which modern organisms have
> descended from ancient organisms; any change in the relative
> frequencies of alleles in the gene pool of a population.š [page 29]

I fail to see how this is a "fallacy of equivocation". Miller is not using
two different definitions simultaneously, but has split a longer, more
detailed definition into two separate parts. Miller's definition of
evolution would thus be a process by which modern organisms have descended
from ancient organisms through changes in the relative frequencies of alleles
in the gene pool of a population. The first part of the definition describes
the result of evolution, while the second part describes the fundamental
mechanism. There is no equivocation here.

Kevin L. O'Brien