Changes

:::::: You got my final point exactly friend; that I came to a paradox in my thinking, one that I couldn't solve. That's why I re-titled this page as "Any Suggestions", and they are welcome. It's positive debate as I see it. I don't see that scientific evolution has described to any complete degree the world coming to be at it is, but at present, I am looking for an explanation which I feel is right, and that - in my opinion - can only be found through observation, experience and reason.

:::::: You got my final point exactly friend; that I came to a paradox in my thinking, one that I couldn't solve. That's why I re-titled this page as "Any Suggestions", and they are welcome. It's positive debate as I see it. I don't see that scientific evolution has described to any complete degree the world coming to be at it is, but at present, I am looking for an explanation which I feel is right, and that - in my opinion - can only be found through observation, experience and reason.

:::::: Where you talk about my ''hand-waving'' though, I feel this is maybe a little unfair. When we speak of evolution, it is sometimes suggested that ''what is observed'' is insufficient to explain microbe to man evolution, and I can understand that point. What I am saying is that, while we have ''observed'' ways and means in which small creatures can traverse large distances, we have also observed that these means are not usable as the means of transporting larger creatures. Therefore, I see no reason to make the assumption that larger creatures could have traversed such distances, just as you see no reason to accept microbe to man evolution. I'm not trying to force an evolutionary explanation on you, but to discuss the problems I see.

:::::: Where you talk about my ''hand-waving'' though, I feel this is maybe a little unfair. When we speak of evolution, it is sometimes suggested that ''what is observed'' is insufficient to explain microbe to man evolution, and I can understand that point. What I am saying is that, while we have ''observed'' ways and means in which small creatures can traverse large distances, we have also observed that these means are not usable as the means of transporting larger creatures. Therefore, I see no reason to make the assumption that larger creatures could have traversed such distances, just as you see no reason to accept microbe to man evolution. I'm not trying to force an evolutionary explanation on you, but to discuss the problems I see.

:::::: "''what significance is the absence of fossils of kangaroos from the fossil record for a few thousand years?''" I think the significance for me is that there aren't as many ''recent'' gaps in fossil evidence. If a creature was supposed to have migrated from somewhere within a few thousand years of today, then it is highly probable that there would be fossil evidence to support this. I can understand the point you make again, and I have to agree to some degree that fossil evidence can in some cases be incomplete, inadequate and somewhat [http://www.trilobites.info/anohome.html misleading], as history shows, although this is usually ''older'' fossil records.

:::::: "''what significance is the absence of fossils of kangaroos from the fossil record for a few thousand years?''" I think the significance for me is that there aren't as many ''recent'' gaps in fossil evidence. If a creature was supposed to have migrated from somewhere within a few thousand years of today, then it is highly probable that there would be fossil evidence to support this. I can understand the point you make again, and I have to agree to some degree that fossil evidence can in some cases be incomplete, inadequate and somewhat [http://www.trilobites.info/anohome.html misleading, as shown by the Anomalocas], although this is usually with ''older'' fossil records.

::::::The rabbits spreading of their own accord is a moot point, given that they still did not need to traverse any great body of water.  I wasn't trying to redefine evolution either. I provided a dictionary definition because I felt that what he had described - in essence the specialization of creatures to their environment - was akin to what I take to be evolution. [[User:Entheogenicorder|Entheogenicorder]] 11:51, 20 November 2008 (EST)

::::::The rabbits spreading of their own accord is a moot point, given that they still did not need to traverse any great body of water.  I wasn't trying to redefine evolution either. I provided a dictionary definition because I felt that what he had described - in essence the specialization of creatures to their environment - was akin to what I take to be evolution. [[User:Entheogenicorder|Entheogenicorder]] 11:51, 20 November 2008 (EST)