WIlliam C. Wilson (
27 Jan 1995 01:16:05 GMT (RFHjr) wrote:
> As I was taught, to use the methods of science correctly you should
> only form an opinion after evidence is found of a conclusive nature.
> This would be called fact. Evidence which can't be proven conclusively but
> has no apparent contradiction would be called Theory. At best Evolution is
> a theory, and special creation something less than that. Anyone from
> either camp who will claim to know the truth is certainly less than a
> scientist.

Or has access to info you aren't jet aware of. By the way the idea
that evolution is only a theory is somewhat hard to hold in light
of the many bacterialogical studies that demonstrate the evolution
and adaptation of organism. Selective breeding (of dogs, cats, hoorses,
etc.) is really also a demonstration of (controled) evolution in action.
The problem seems to occur when we try to take the proven fact of
evolution and apply it to historical instances where the record is
incomplete or where our personal egos/biases are on the line.

William C. Wilson