[MD] Dawkins a Materialist

[Heather Perella]

> dmb says:
> Secondly if
> it has precious little 
> evidence, then its not a scientific belief. If a
> scientist chooses to 
> believe such an unsupported thing, then he is not
> much of a scientists.

     dmb, for over 100 years scientists that studied
evolution, believed, yes, believed in what Darwin
argued, which is the fossil record is incomplete,
thus, gradualism in evolution.  Then you have these
scientists, Gould and Eldridge, who question
gradualism with punctuated equilibrium (PE).  PE has
evidence to support it.  Scientists have noticed that
gradualism does occur, but in these places gradualism
occurs, PE happens with much, much more frequency. 
It's not that the fossil record is incomplete as
Darwin postulated.  It is that something else is
occurring during evolution.  And this is also the
argument between an armchair, ivory tower scientists,
who rejected much of the non-evidence for Darwin just
had to be right.  Yet, the field work didn't show
this.  The whole field of scientists that mentioned
evolution and gradualism is very large, at every
university that teaches evolution.  These were
scientists not doing good science you'd probably say. 
This whole issue was rampant in all the textbooks, all
universities, yet, nobody actually questioned it
enough to discard it.  Scientists the world over just
believed Darwin had to be right.  This is faith in
Darwin's argument, maybe?  A belief in what he said,
and a faith that it will continue to work this way,
maybe.  Yet, I'm not being strong and strict with the
faith aspect, but the belief was present for no
evidence could be found.


wet morning,
SA

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com