Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ptsfa.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!zehntel!vlsvax1!qantel!dual!ptsfa!kmo
From: kmo@ptsfa.UUCP (ken olsen)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: The Scientific Case for Creation (Part 1)
Message-ID: <550@ptsfa.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 10-Apr-85 12:04:22 EST
Article-I.D.: ptsfa.550
Posted: Wed Apr 10 12:04:22 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 13-Apr-85 06:01:48 EST
References: <328@iham1.UUCP>
Reply-To: kmo@ptsfa.UUCP (ken olsen)
Distribution: net
Organization: Pacific Bell, San Francisco
Lines: 12
Summary: 

In article <328@iham1.UUCP> rck@iham1.UUCP (Ron Kukuk) writes:
>
>            THE SCIENTIFIC CASE FOR CREATION: 116 CATEGORIES OF EVIDENCE
>
>       I.  (Life Sciences): THE THEORY OF ORGANIC EVOLUTION IS INVALID.
>
>           A.  EVOLUTION* HAS NEVER BEEN OBSERVED.
>
>	etc . . .

Just out of curiosity - has CREATION ever been observed?
I mean OBSERVED - not postulated from "faith" in a god or gods!