Because if a Creator (apparently) approves of cruelty to arthropods or
mollusks, then what does that say about his attitude on cruelty to humans?
The wasp example is an old and particularly disturbing example, but people
had the same thoughts much earlier in regard to predation. Some of them
became vegetarian as a result, others reacted by apologizing to the animal.
In America, we do our best to ignore it.

Sorry to bring up such a controversial and nonconchologic topic. Maybe we'd
better drop it.

Andy

-----Original Message-----
From: Conchologists of America List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Allen Aigen
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 8:56 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: 'Percs


Andy,
There are enough parasitic snails to keep this malacologic (as some have
gone completely internal in holothurians, losing their shells.)What is it
about parasites that makes people cringe?  Perhaps the idea that the Creator
made life in his own image an d therefore benificent ("... and it was
good.")?  Real life is not the Garden of Eden, but it is good!

Allen Aigen
[log in to unmask]

-- Andy Rindsberg <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Pretty good evidence of evolution in action. Cones are in the process
> of
"losing" their percs as changes in aperture morphology make percs
unnecessary. The same way you are in the process of "losing" your appendix
and wisdom teeth. And slugs "losing" their internalized vestigial shells.

> Which begs the question, Why would Intelligent Design create half a
> perc?

> G. Thomas Watters, PhD
[snip]

+++++++++

Tom,

The one that really gets me is why anyone would want to create hundreds of
species of wasps that sting and paralyze caterpillars, drag them into holes
in the ground, and then lay an egg in each one so the wasp larva can eat the
caterpillar from the inside while it is still alive.

Andy

Andrew K. Rindsberg
Geological Survey of Alabama