Quote:
Originally Posted by Poimen  Quote:
Originally Posted by BobVigneault You couple that story with this one and these staunch anti-theists are beginning to look like the refined woman proudly strutting across the ballroom floor and doesn't realize that her gown has fallen down around her ankles. At the base of evolution, at the base of non-Biblical cosmology is a philosophical assumption (religion) that is getting harder and harder to defend. | How would the second story be a refutation of or in opposition to evolution? |
It's not a refutation, just another example of how their paradigm gets messed up by new discoveries. The story talks about how the biologists are puzzled because the simple jellyfishes seemed to be descended from a more complex ancient critter.
Which is similar to a proposition I made once, long ago, in a philosophy of science class:
"It seems possible that dolphins descended from Tahitian pearl divers, whose selective breeding for the best divers got out of hand."
Nobody could come up with a reasonable refutation except that they were a different species. Well. . . duh? Why doesn't it work the other way around?