Dear commenter

Crappy blog won't let me respond to a commenter so here is my reply to David on his comment on Natural Selection.


Okay I read the relevant passage and followed the links.  I copied the passage for all to see here:

1.  Blyth was a Christian and what we would nowadays call a ‘special creationist’. E.g. concerning the seasonal changes in animal colouring (such as the mountain hare becoming white in winter), Blyth said that these were ‘striking instances of design, which so clearly and forcibly attest the existence of an omniscient great First Cause’.17 And he said that animals ‘evince superhuman wisdom, because it is innate, and therefore, instilled by an all-wise Creator’.18
2. Blyth correctly saw the concept of natural selection as a mechanism by which the sick, old and unfit were removed from a population; that is, as a preserving factor and for the maintenance of the status quo—the created kind.19 Creationists like Edward Blyth (and English theologian William Paley) saw natural selection as a process of culling; that is, of choosing between several traits, all of which must first be in existence before they can be selected.

Response 1a.  Darwin was a Christian too.  He was going to follow in his father's and grandfather's footsteps and become a doctor, a surgeon, but in the days of no anesthetic, he could not stomach it.  The second career choice was seminary school.  I don't know a bout today, but back then you can't get in seminary school without being a Christian.  There is no mention of Blythe entering seminary school.

1b, Blythe stating what everyone currently thought, including Charles Darwin, that God designed the animals to fit the environment they lived in is no biggie.  It is an observation that everyone can see.  Attesting it to the creator is merely being lazy.  Look the Sun it rises and sets once in a 24 hour period, God is good.  Is also a lazy statement.  He never asked how God made the design.  Strangely no creationist has ever suggested that Darwin's idea of natural selection has proved that God created a system that is adaptable ing the extreme and works without any direct intervention and doesn't that make him great?  But no, creationist have spent all that time trying to prove he is wrong.  See Scopes Monkey Trial and the modern version.

2a, Darwin's Natural Selection and Blythe's are different.  Darwin is about selection of positive traits for future animals, and Blythe is about culling living animals of the weak and infirm.  Nice, but one will affect future generations and the other has no impact on future generations, but does have an affect on who becomes lunch.

2b, Darwin never suggested that the traits that were being selected did not exist.  He said that the best traits present in the environment, the ones best suited for that environment are selected for.  Nothing about new things being invented.


The problem I find with creationists is that they are looking for something wrong with something contrary to your beliefs.  When it might be that your beliefs need to be subjected to some review.