Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihnet.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!ihnet!eklhad
From: eklhad@ihnet.UUCP (K. A. Dahlke)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Isolated Species again**2
Message-ID: <233@ihnet.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 27-May-85 08:55:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihnet.233
Posted: Mon May 27 08:55:13 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 29-May-85 04:38:00 EDT
References: <3570028@csd2.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 68

> []
> I first posted this note about ten days ago. So far, I have not received
> any responses, and there have only been two or three new notes by
> creationists on the topic of isolated species, all by Dan Boskovich.
> I will respond to these in my next note, but will say here that I don't
> think they offer a reasonable creationist explanation.
> 
> Therefore, I have decided to keep posting this note at roughly ten day
> intervals, until I either do get a response which offers a reasonable
> creationist explanation of isolated species, or I get written statements
> from no fewer than 13 (thirteen) creationists promising never again to
> either claim explicitly or imply that there is no positive evidence for
> evolution.

My thanks to Isaac for carrying the ball on this one,
as I (the originator of the discussion) have been rather busy lately.
Creationists might question the methods used to determine the islands' ages,
or the number of niches on the islands, or whatever;  
but a lot of things would have to be wrong for creationism to be right.
You might question geology, plate techtonics, evolution, natural selection,
etc, but you still have the task of explaining why they all independently
support evolution, while refuting a "sudden emergence of species on earth",
the cornerstone of creationism.

A month before the "isolated species" discussion began,
I posted more evidence for evolution:
biochemical similarities among related species.
Again, you may question the concept of "related", as determined by morphology,
or fossil records, or whatever, but it is a clear case of
independent corroborating evidence supporting evolution
and refuting creationism.
Furthermore, the biochemical similarities are predictive and testable.
Take a pair of untested species and use fossil evidence to ascertain the time
of separation.  Then examine functionally equivalent proteans,
and observe the differences.  The correlation is quite strong.

As with isolated species, the creationists were not
able to produce a valid refutation.  Perhaps I, like Isacc, should
post this article every 10 days, until a creationist explains
the correlation between biochemical structures and species separation,
or until they admit that strong evolutionary evidence exists.

This is, of course, the battering ram strategy, and I hope it
makes a dent before my arms get tired.  Beware Isaac, the typical defense
does not make the walls stronger, since that is impossible.
Instead, there are always distractions:
 Become indignant about strawman creationist arguments,
bring up Noah's ark (which makes the isolation problem worse, not better),
question each piece of evidence individually without explaining
why all this independent evidence supports evolution,
explain away any annoying evidence with a miracle,
use the Bible as a refutation, discuss the metaphysical nature of science,
bring up examples of unethical scientific practices,
quote Darwin (or other brilliant evolutionists)
making an error due to insufficient data or knowledge,
point out inadequacies in existing evolutionary mechanisms
and don't stop until the mechanisms explain the vibrations of each atom
in an evolving species, throw in cosmology,
discuss entropy (if only you understood it),
enumerate the various degrees held by well known creationists,
...
Beware Isacc, the bag of tricks is enormous.
actually, it might be interesting to compile a list,
as the one above is surely not exhaustive.
It is difficult to keep a subject on track long enough to discuss it properly.
-- 

Karl Dahlke    ihnp4!ihnet!eklhad