Macrevo does not come from microevo

All are welcome to this forum, which is for debating the teaching of creationism or intelligent design in schools. This forum can be boisterous, and you should not participate if easily offended.

Moderator: Moderators

Re: Macrevo does not come from microevo

Postby Atheoscanadensis » Thu Oct 10, 2013 1:01 pm

Christine Janis wrote:
And what do you guys think about the strange disconnect between Patterson's 1980s words on this site: ttp://bevets.com/equotesp.htm and his late 90s words in the email he wrote? (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/patterson.html )


A lot of Patterson's quotemines come from the days when he was supporting the (then new) cladistic approach to systematics. The original aim of cladistics (as used by Patterson and other paleontologists in the early 80s) was to reveal the *pattern* of evolution (i.e., the sets of nested hierarchies) without reference to the *process* (i.e., scenarios of why something might have happened a certain way), so that then the pattern can be used to test the process.

So, many apparently "antievolution" quotes made by Patterson relate to him being a little scathing about those people who mixed up pattern and process, and sought to find actual ancestors in the fossil record. Of course, Patterson himself did not think that evolution was not a valid hypothesis --- one only need reference his books and articles on the subject. Plus I knew Patterson personally and can affirm this.


Thanks Christine. That makes more sense. I suspected it was something like that, but not having any personal knowledge of Patterson or his writings made me unsure. Not that pointing out Patterson's real leanings will do any good with my interlocutor. He quotes Lewin's Evolutionary Theory under fire wherein Lewin quotes Ayala as saying that changes do not accumulate. This is a well-known misquote and so I responded by citing Ayala himself saying that the quote was fictitious and that changes could not help but accumulate. How does my interlocutor respond? With the usual creationist response to inconvenient information i.e. denial. Apparently (and I'm sure you've all encountered this excuse before) Ayala really did say what Lewin attributes to him but later on lied about it, denying it just to cover his ass. What integrity!
Atheoscanadensis
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:00 pm

Previous

Return to Free For All

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

cron