>
> I repeat, I'm going to have to look at your evolutionary claims more
> closely so that I can see what is truly being asserted.
Cathy, I am going to weigh in here with a very simplified and incomplete
version. The idea that evolution happened in fits and starts has given
way to a belief in gradual change. I will not go into the evidence.
But it is pretty compelling. No one needs to apologize. I made an off
hand reference to this when I made the joke that we might not even be
human yet. The biologists I know leave the question of the discrete
point in time when *blip* we were not human to *blip* when we were human
to religion and philosophy as they believe that is its rightful place.
They go to their various churches like the rest of us do to find
inspiration, and insight. There have been references on the list to
various scientists who profess atheism. There are LOTS of good
scientists who are theists.
It seems to me that humans tend to believe that we are somehow very
different from what we were in Christ's time or at some other time older
etc. I was struck with the potential fallacy of this thought when I saw
the Tutankhamen exhibit in Seattle a number of years ago. Seeing the
every day objects that ancient Egyptians used and how similar they are
to what I use, was very powerful.
Don't get me wrong. We are very different. But in some fundamental way
we are the same. That is what I believe. As others have illustrated
here in their own way with A=A I will say that I=Tut I=Cathy I=Brett
etc.. Once I had made that leap, everything else became crystal clear.
I do not even know if this explanation helps
and I remain
Marie
Marie