eonic evolution

Ron Gatrelle gatrelle at tils-ttr.org
Fri Oct 13 16:25:12 EDT 2000

    As a Minister I never cease to be amaze at how often I end up being the
person promoting evolution relative to the great climatic and geologic
changes in the planet over the epochs, ages, periods, and eras while the
"scientists" end up promoting the status quo. (I put that in quotes so as to
not offend any of you real scientists as the people I am addressing here
look more like agenda-ists -- with or without degrees.)
    It seems as though some here consider Danaus plexippus to have been
created in situ. Monarchs just "appeared" on the earth, no ancestor
(especially not a non-migratory one), no evolution, no change, and therefore
no chance for this almost extinct species (it must be, because The expert
here called it endangered). The genetic recognition within plexippus of
solar cycles that prompt migration has always been there.
    And not only that, but the climate and geology which it inhabits must
have come into being in situ also. The exact temperature, the exact
elevation. No continental shift. No Ice Ages (especially not the Wisconsin).
(Remember that even the most fundamental creationists believe in continental
drift: "in those days the earth was divided," and environmental catastrophe
(the flood)). Everything must stay as it is or monarchs will become extinct,
guaranteed. Why? Simply because they are incapable of the evolution or the
slightest adaptation!
    Now, if your response is: "Ron, this is a gross oversimplification and a
misrepresentation of what we believe." Fine. I can also say that your
presentation of one of North America's most common butterflies as endangered
is also a gross misrepresentation -- and -- this does not mean I am the
enemy, anti-environment, anti-monarch, or on the payroll of a criminal... I
mean chemical company.
    Next, if you admit that D. plexippus got to where it is today via
evolution (from a far away primordial ooze) and if you acknowledge that is
it still evolving and thus capable of "change" or "adaptation" then you can
not also turn around and play God by claming to know the limitations beyond
which its future evolution can not go. Global warming and cooling, the rise
and fall of mountains, are all part of the natural course of things. Which
is why God chose to use evolution within creation to promote and protect
    I agree with Kondla, a lot of this is a tempest in a tea pot. On the
other hand I agree that a lot of this is not just about monarch well being
but peoples financial well being. And what about the monarchs?  I think they
have a lot better chance of surviving the next thousand years then we humans
Ron Gatrelle
PS   Remember. You can't get somebody's goat unless they have a goat to get.

More information about the Leps-l mailing list