Theos-Talk Archives (November 1999 Message tl00296)

On Mon, 15 Nov 1999 19:41:05 EST WLR7D@aol.com wrote:

> I would like to see your evidence that mutations have created a new kind of
> creature.  Good luck.
no proof, but indication enough... :
Well, turn to any good college biology book about the
development off fish. (Biology, Campbell) First they had
one fin, at the back. Then through a dubbling of genes (it
happens sometimes, hope it falls under the catogory of
mutation) there were two regions where fins developed.
Another dubbling made the two front fins, that in us humans
and other landanimals became front feet.
Just an example.
>
> The notion that organelles are the remnants of "eaten" bacteria or the like
> is speculative.  If you have proofs I would be interested.
Well, the genes in the mitochondrien have been compared
with the genes of the animal in which they live and the
genes of cyanobacteria. The genes have far more in common
with the genes of the latter, than with us. source (and
better explanation): Slanted Truths: essays on gaia,
symbiosis, and evolution, by Lynn Margulis, Dorian Sagan;
1997, Springer-Verlag, New York. In your local library, if
the library is as good as the one in my home town.

> Evolutionary theory is riddled with fanciful explanations because clear proof
> of macroevolution has not been forthcoming.  Problem is we are all so
> schooled that evolution is "science" we tend not to examine the
> foundations(which rest on sand).
Well, the above is indication, if not proof.It sounds
likely to me, what more can I do? Even if there is
intelligence in the universe that guides the mutations and
other ways in which changes happen, those intelligences
still have an easier time if there are physical mechanisms
that help. I mean, the fact of the diversity of life is
there...

Katinka
----------------------
NHL Leeuwarden
hesse600@tem.nhl.nl