Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sphinx.UChicago.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!think!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!houxm!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!beth
From: beth@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (beth d. christy)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Glarch
Message-ID: <370@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 27-Apr-85 19:51:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: sphinx.370
Posted: Sat Apr 27 19:51:14 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 30-Apr-85 02:17:33 EDT
Organization: U. Chicago - Computation Center
Lines: 16


In article <946@uwmacc.UUCP> Paul Dubois writes:
>That's true.  Living fossils don't contradict evolution because nothing
>does.  Not an increase in complexity.  Not stasis.  Not a decrease in
>complexity.  Evolution thus reduces to description void of explanatory
>value.
>..........
>Since never, I guess.  It "predicts" everything, and therefore,
>nothing.

Paul, you seem rather bothered by the (erroneous, I think) belief that
the evolutionary theory has no predictive value.  I'm curious as to
exactly what predictive value you think the creationist theory has?

--JB  (not Elizabeth, not Beth Ann, not Mary Beth...Just Beth)