At 8:43 AM -0700 8/19/99, RICHARD PISACRETA wrote:
>>Evolution is a fact, not a theory. Any argument is about the details
>>only. Sigh.
>>
>I must have missed something. Evolution within a species is a fact.
>Evolution between species is a theory. I have seen no definitive proof of
>one species through intermediate steps becoming a new species.
I've already covered the question of "proof" as a scientific concept.
For supporting data (above the bacteriological level):
1. Speciation in cichlid fish in Lake Victoria.
2. Speciation in various birds and lizards on groups of neighboring small
islands, where DNA evidence has shown that physically similar animals
occupying comparable ecological niches and more different from each other
than they are from physically different animals on the same island.
>The Big Bang theory has problems. One is the "great wall" of star clusters
>that shouldn't be where it is. The other is the recent report by Herrnstein
>that questions the age of the universe that the Big Bang depends on.
This was mainly an error-of-measure problem (the minimum likely age of the
Universe was less than the maximum likely age of certain stars). More
accurate measurements have resolved the apparent paradox.
* PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* Psychology Department 507-389-6217 *
* "The University formerly known as Mankato State" *
* http://www.mankato.msus.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html *
