Mithcoriel
Member
Hey guys. I'm working on debunking an old creationist book (called "Life -- How did it get here? By evolution or by creation?") and I'm trying to debunk these quotes:
Now, if these were merely creationist claims, I'd just say "You're wrong. The small changes add up over time." and possibly refer to Talkorigins, which even adresses this specific publication.
BUT: the problem is, these are quotes, so they might be quote mines of legitimate scientists, rather than fake scientists talking nonsense. Even Talkorigins just debunks the claim, without explaining what the scientists quoted actually meant by them. Anyone have any ideas?
Googling for this "on call" magazine suggests it's either a submagazine of the Boston Globe or an "english medical publication"."In breeding procedures, breeders usually find that after a few generations, an optimum is reached beyond which further improvement is impossible, and there has been no new species formed which is infertile with its ancestral form, and fertile with other individuals of the same species. Breeding procedures, therefore, would seem to refute, rather than support Evolution. "
—On Call, July 3, 1972, p. 9.
Wikipedia says Lewin is a science writer.“Species do indeed have a capacity to undergo minor modifications in their physical and other characteristics, but this is limited and with a longer perspective it is reflected in an oscillation about a mean [average].”
Science, "Evolutionary Theory Under Fire", by Roger Lewin, November 21, 1980, p.884.
Now, if these were merely creationist claims, I'd just say "You're wrong. The small changes add up over time." and possibly refer to Talkorigins, which even adresses this specific publication.
BUT: the problem is, these are quotes, so they might be quote mines of legitimate scientists, rather than fake scientists talking nonsense. Even Talkorigins just debunks the claim, without explaining what the scientists quoted actually meant by them. Anyone have any ideas?