Re: paleonet Dinosaurs and Creationism

From
Date
Reply-To
>  Wouldn't their "argument" only indicate that the Dinosaur
>  in question didn't die out with the others?  (Not that I am
>  seriously proposing that....)

But that would be a logical conclusion.  Antievolutionary arguments routinely reflect the delusion that a single purported problem for conventional evolutionary or old earth views totally overthrows conventional geology, biology, and astronomy.  However, total lack of consistency is no problem for their own arguments.  

Although all humans are affected by their biases and limitations, scientists try to find the best comprehensive explanations.  Overemphasis on individual spectacular discoveries misrepresents the daily nature of science.

Thus, on the one hand, we need to emphasize that evolution is subject to challenge.  However, a legitimate challenge will constitute a credible effort to explain all the available evidence.  So far, evolution has stood up to testing; no competing idea has.  The devious language of pro-ID efforts makes this difficult.  Any legitmate evidence against evolution ought to be presented.  Those clamoring for "examination of the evidence" or "presentation of evidence against evolution", however, are usually demanding the treatment of bogus science as valid.  It's important to reply carefully.  As scientists, we support free examination of the evidence about evolution; we reject the bogus "evidence" and flawed arguments that are touted against evolution.  


    Dr. David Campbell 
    Old Seashells 
    University of Alabama 
    Biodiversity & Systematics 
    Dept. Biological Sciences 
    Box 870345 
    Tuscaloosa, AL  35487-0345 USA
    bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com

That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at Droitgate Spa