35
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 171:
Line 171: + +
Talk:Counterexamples to Evolution (view source)
Revision as of 01:41, August 30, 2010
, 01:41, August 30, 2010→Chipmunks on Devil's tower?
::: I have an open mind about possible explanations. But proving that one theory is wrong does not require proving that another theory is right. If a math proof is flawed, then it is flawed regardless of whether a valid proof is available.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:11, 29 August 2010 (EDT)
::: I have an open mind about possible explanations. But proving that one theory is wrong does not require proving that another theory is right. If a math proof is flawed, then it is flawed regardless of whether a valid proof is available.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:11, 29 August 2010 (EDT)
:::: This strikes me as more of a "unanswered question in biology" than a "counterexample to evolution". The right answer is out there somewhere, though we may never be able prove what it is. It seems likely to me that whatever that answer is, it will be compatible with both creationist and evolutionist accounts. (Unless, of course, Noah made a world tour dropping off critters is inaccessible spots as the flood receded!) --[[User:LyleT|LyleT]] 21:41, 29 August 2010 (EDT)