- Nov 9, 2007
- Reaction score
- People's Republic of Maryland
I kind of feel like we are missing each others' points here. This is not the place to debate immunity and susceptibility, which are, btw, somewhat different, or smallpox which I still believe is not the most adequate example of what you are trying to say. You haven't really answered my question about macro-/micro-evolution, and it really was a genuine question.ytterbiumanalyst said:I didn't notice that you had added this bit until this morning. Susceptibility is exactly what we're talking about here. Both the colonists and the native Americans were exposed to smallpox equally due to the disease's high communicability. Therefore, a lower rate of infection in one group as opposed to the other would be evolutionarily derived, just as a lower mortality rate for those who contracted it. Both resistance to a disease and recovery thereof are caused by the presence of antibodies in the blood, which can be obtained genetically. The colonists would have had a higher level of smallpox antibodies due to the collective resistance that evolved in Europeans in the XIV to XVI centuries. The native Americans did not have this collective resistance because their ancestors did not have the same exposure to the disease.
Why do you keep looking for excuses as to why evolution couldn't have occurred?
I am not "looking for excuses as to why evolution couldn't have occurred". I actually do think it has and does, but I have yet to see compelling evidence for it. Now, that is really my problem, but I'm not about to undertake college level courses in biology/zoology, etc. in order to be able to talk the talk as others here are able to do. I have far more pressing and important issues to deal with in my life than that. There actually is a very good chapter in Fr. Seraphim Rose's bio Not of This World... that addresses the whole issue of evolutionary philosophy from an Orthodox Christian perspective which I shall have to re-visit. As I recall, he has some very interesting things to say about it.
So, given all of my own shortcomings, and the fact that this whole discussion seems to be going nowhere, really, I shall bow out of it, at least for now. Perhaps if and when I rejoin it, I shall have a little more to say of substance, and perhaps a greater understanding of what some of our more scientifically educated members are trying to communicate. As I said in an earlier post, it all seems to me and my poor little mind to really boil down to a debate more about Otherworldliness vs. Materialism than the title of the thread, and what is more important for the salvation of our souls. But that's just the unworthy opinion of a simple, struggling sinner.
God bless all of you, and have a Happy New Year!