On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:12:12 GMT, Len Lekx
wrote:

On 25 Jan 2004 10:48:09 -0800, (Christopher M.
Jones) wrote:

Creationism is a disproved theory. Evolution is a
proved theory. Nobody teaches the phlogiston

You can't "prove" or "disprove" these kinds of theories. We have
evidence suggesting the idea that organisms adapt, but that's a far
cry from proving the mechanism by which it happens.

theory in schools, except as an example of wrong
headed theories which can be disproved.

And you don't think that, a hundred or so years from now,
scientists may revisit the phlogiston theory with new insights... and
say "DAMN! They had it right all along!" ;-)

I wish people would understand the difference between the "Theory of
Evolution" (i.e. species change over time) which is an everyday
observable fact and "Natural Selection" which is the theory that
postulates how evolution can lead to what we see today.

Go to any university fruit fly lab and you will be able to directly
observe evolution in action, it is as much as observed fact as fire is
hot, things fall down, if you warm up ice it will melt. Evolution is
about as solid as science gets

Natural selection is the process that is thought to drive evolution in
a manner that will lead towards species that have a greater chance of
reproduction in the evironment that they live in, and that this may
account for the production of complex animals from single cells
organisms over a 3.5 billion year timeframe.

All evidence points to natural selection as being the most likely
explanation for this, but there is still discussion as to how natural
selection operates in complex environments, what impact evironmental
changes has on natural selection, and how quickly natural selection
operates. The controversy in the scientific commmunity isn't about
evolution, and its really not even about natural selection, but about
the specifics of how natural selection works.