M.J.Thomas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Joanne,
>
> You write, "You may want to look at the scientific
> evidence for evolution. If you really think it is
> unproven, I think you don't understand."
>
> I did not make my viewpoint clear. IMO, Evolution
> happens and has done since the creation of this
> universe. The bone of contention here is the
> question of how it works.
> Some like to think of the evolutionary process as
> something purely mechanical, unintelligent,
> random, things changing by chance, and so on.
> Others see it as the work of an Intelligent
> Designer but, importantly, not a Designer in the
> Religious or spiritual sense. Then there are those
> who see the workings of evolution as a blend of
> these two extremes. The pertinent point here is
> that all three schools of thought have their
> learned supporters from the relevant scientific
> fraternities.

Bernard has already addressed this -- there is the fourth choice which you are not considering. As he writes: "BOTH chance and necessity (natural selection) are essential."

> I'm constantly suprised by people who
> automatically assume that if you question the
> Darwinian or Neo-Darwinian view of how evolution
> works, you are in effect denying the existence of
> evolution.

Maybe that's because the questions suggest the questioner has missed something important.

> BTW, if a person does not believe a thing to be
> proven, it does not necessarily follow that they
> therefore do not understand or are ignorant of the
> evidence for that thing.

Unless the thing has been proven and the person who does not believe is unaware (ignorant) of that fact.

> Evidence of any kind is always open to different
> interpretations, and the consensus is not always
> correct.

ID pronponents do not offer scientific interpretations that better explain the evidence. They offer non-science or junk science.

> In South America grows a particular type of plant
> (an orchid, I think) that is totally dependent on
> a particular type of bird (a species of Humming
> Bird, I believe). The plant and the bird are in
> perfect and total symbiosis. Without one, the
> other will die. Somewhere in Africa lives a
> extraordinarily flat tortoise that lives or hides
> in narrow clefts in the rocks in its territory.
> Until Darwinists/Evolutionists can explain how
> these fascinating and complex states of affairs
> evolved purely through chance, random mutation,
> etc., I for one shall continue to consider the
> jury still out on whether evolution is purely and
> totally mechanistic or involves at least an element of I.D.

The jury is not out; there is a verdict. These examples you mention are identical to the question of the bacteria's tail in the New Yorker article in the link. Read that again. Then, read up on natural selection.