The teaching of evolution

[Curtis Clark]

At 06:16 PM 10/9/99 -0400, Susan B. Farmer wrote:
>To play devils advocate here, some creationists might argue that this
>is not an example of macro-evolution because the resultant species
>is still a lizard.  (or a fish, or a tree-fern to use your other
>examples.)  It is definately an example of speciation; but not
>the evolution of a new species (aka macro-evolution).  How do you
>counter that argument?

This is actually the failing of scientific creationism--none of them have
even the faintest clue of what where the originally created kinds, despite
that being necessarily the single most important "fact" in biology (if one
is a creationist). In recent practice, the "kind" boundaries have
corresponded to the prominence of the group in modern American culture: the
"human" kind (as distinct from the ape kind), but the "lizard" kind and
perhaps (brace yourself, Ken), the "fungus" kind.

Btw, for those of you in southern California, I'm debating Duane Gish, a
noted creationist, on October 20 at California State Polytechnic
University, Pomona. I'll send details to anyone interested. Yes, it was
probably a stupid thing to agree to, but a lot of my students will be there
and I don't want to let them down.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Curtis Clark                  http://www.csupomona.edu/~jcclark/
Biological Sciences Department             Voice: (909) 869-4062
California State Polytechnic University      FAX: (909) 869-4078
Pomona CA 91768-4032  USA                  jcclark at csupomona.edu