Subject: Re: abiogenesis
Date: 18 Aug 1999 06:41:31 GMT
From: Chris Ho-Stuart <>
Organization: Queensland University of Technology, Australia
Newsgroups: aus.religion,aus.religion.christian,nz.soc.religion
In aus.religion.christian Tigger <>
wrote:

[snip]

> >> Niles is wrong. The fossil record supports evolution.
> >
> > And your credentials ? His are impressive.
>
> I quote someone else. Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Dawkins. Bloody
> impressive credentials. Have never heard of this weirdo Niles Eldridge.

Careful Tigger. "beyond.help" is totally unreliable as a basis
for making any conclusions about anything; and specifically about
Niles Eldredge.

Niles is an active, influential and mainstream evolutionary
scientist. He first came to international prominence for work
in the 70s done in collaboration with Stephen Jay Gould, whom you
mention above.

Niles is not a weirdo; and beyond.help has not the slightest
comprehension of his work or opinions. He appears to be using
stock standard creationist distortions and misrepresentations.
I have posted some extracts from the man himself which give a
better picture of what he really thinks.

Niles is well aware that the fossil record supports evolution,
and uses that evidence extensively to illuminate and study the
process of evolution over time.

[snip]

> Fossiles are buried in layers of rock, called strata. Only hard parts of
> animals are fossilised, like their bones. There is a complete and total
> agreement in all fossil finds whereby animals we consider to be "simple"
> are always found in lower (that means older) strata (remember, that's 'layers')
> than animals we consider more 'complex'.

Careful again. This is completely false.

Evolution does not require an increase in "complexity" by any measure
of which I am aware. This is the classic "progression" fallacy.

For example, dinosaurs are highly complex creatures: no less complex
than the mammals which now replace them. And we still have living
today creatures which are "simpler" than the dinosaurs. There
are also examples which suggest increasing simplicity within a
lineage; though terms terms "complex" and "simple" are not really
well defined in this context.

Evolution is about diversification; not about progressive complexity.
Cheers -- Chris Ho-Stuart