nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 61:
Line 61: + +
Revert; there's no point in taking out a (quoted) argument and leaving in the refutation of that argument.
Advocates for the [[teaching of evolution]] as a finding of mainstream science tend to use two different meanings of "evolution".
Advocates for the [[teaching of evolution]] as a finding of mainstream science tend to use two different meanings of "evolution".
*We have fossil evidence for evolution. It's a fact. (teacher in CNN article)
This apparently refers to the assertion that the appearance of new forms of life is supported by fossils (see [[radiometric dating|carbon dating]]). But the context of the quote implies that the teacher was actually talking about the notion that "new species can evolve from older ones -- such as humans evolving from ancient apes." [http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/03/08/creationism.vs.evolution/]
This apparently refers to the assertion that the appearance of new forms of life is supported by fossils (see [[radiometric dating|carbon dating]]). But the context of the quote implies that the teacher was actually talking about the notion that "new species can evolve from older ones -- such as humans evolving from ancient apes." [http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/03/08/creationism.vs.evolution/]