Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site hao.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!cepu!hao!ward
From: ward@hao.UUCP (Mike Ward)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Kinds
Message-ID: <1420@hao.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 26-Mar-85 22:41:48 EST
Article-I.D.: hao.1420
Posted: Tue Mar 26 22:41:48 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 30-Mar-85 00:50:50 EST
Distribution: net
Organization: High Altitude Obs./NCAR, Boulder CO
Lines: 26

[]
The other day, as I was tying some Green Drakes in anticipation
of a Spring fishing trip to the Frying Pan, it occured to me that I
knew that the insect I was trying to imitate well enough to fool a
trout was Ephemerellidae Ephemerella glacialis.

Actually, I had to look that up.  Just before I take these flies
fishing I'll look up, once again, the life style and emergent habits of
this species.  Thus do I hope to catch more fish.

If creationism were science, their notion of kinds would be as useful
as the entomologists' notion of species.  I suspect that there has been
no attempt to do any serious comprehensive catagorization of life into 
an ordering of kinds.

Is this true?  Is there any serious body of creation science?  Or is this
just another bit of evidence that creationism is nothing more than an
attack on science itself?

-- 

Michael Ward, NCAR/SCD
UUCP: {hplabs,nbires,brl-bmd,seismo,menlo70,stcvax}!hao!ward
ARPA: hplabs!hao!ward@Berkeley
BELL: 303-497-1252
USPS: POB 3000, Boulder, CO  80307