From    : LARRY SITES
To      : ARTHUR BIELE                                    RCVD
Subj    : TRANSITIONS, PART 8.

ARTHUR BIELE to ALL on 09-19-94 00:25 re: TRANSITIONS, PART 8.

AB>As can be seen from my posts, the fossil record, as detailed in the
AB>evolutionary literature, provides substantial support for Creation
AB>theory.
AB>        3. The record shows that new biological designs typically make
AB>           abrupt appearances,

Define "abrupt".

AB>This is not at all what Evolution theory predicts. This is very
AB>consistent and supportive of creation theory!

Explain just exactly how the appearance of increasingly complex lifeforms
over the course of MILLIONS of years is consistant with and supports the
creation theory when the reference book for creation theory claims that ALL
lifeforms were created in a mere 6 DAYS and by deduction this happened a
mere few thousand years ago.

AB>I offer the following as a conclusion.

AB>       "I feel that the hypotheses of common ancestry in systematics ha
AB>        not been merely boring, not just a lack of knowledge; I think i
AB>        has been positively anti-knowledge. ...
AB>        Well, What about evolution? It certainly has the function of
AB>        knowledge, but does it convey any? Well, we are back to the
AB>        question I have been putting to people, "Is there one thing you
AB>        can tell me about evolution?" The absence of answers seem to
AB>        suggest that it is true, evolution does not convey any
AB>        knowledge." Paleontologist Colin Patterson in a Speech given at
AB>        the Am. Museum of Natural History, Nov. 1981.

AB> Patterson blame[s] evolution for the lack of
AB>progress in Paleontology.

BUNK! This IS the quote that Sunderland TOTALLY misrepresents! See my
message to you titled with his name. If you were at the speech YOU would
know that. Since, to my knowledge, this has NEVER been published outside
creationist circles, it appears that you stold it from some creationist
author. Who did you steal it from? Is it ok to steal and lie for your god?

AB>In light of these 8 posts I've just posted, and that FAQ's such as Ms.
AB>Hunt's are still widely circulated and believed by evolutionists
AB>is evidence that Academia does suppress the spread of knowledge of the
AB>scientific inadequacy of the materialistic, atheistic, naturalistic
AB>evolution.

BUNK! Your misrepresentation of out of context quotes is evidence of no
such thing. But the fact that this misquote is still widely circulated by
creationist organizations such as the ICR is evidence that the creation
"theory" must rely on lies in an attempt to win out by appearing to tear
down evolution.

AB> þ OLX 1.52 þ You Shall Know Them by Their Fruits.

When a religion bears lies and theft in promoting it's creation "theory"
what kind of a religion will it be known as? Now that you know that this
Patterson quote is a misrepresentation, you can no longer present it
without being guilty of the sin of false witness. Are you willing to
deliberatly lie for your lord? Do you think he will grant you eternal life
for such efforts? What if he lied to you so that he could steal YOUR life?