[asa] Icons of Evolution; was Behe's Math... was Arrogance

Moorad:
I would say that if anyone wishes to discuss Jonathan Wells' "Icons of
Evolution" intelligently then it is imperative that they read the book
first. I have read it. In fact, I reviewed it soon after it was
published (New Zealand Science Teacher, no. 97, 2001, pp. 42-44).

I concluded at that time that "There is little doubt that a number of
textbook writers have been sloppy, and this is a matter of concern, but
I do not accept that any of the authors have been deliberately
fraudulent. Further, though the individual scientific facts may have
been accurately presented by Wells, he has been selective in what he has
reported and he has put his own particular spin on those facts." Today I
would question that the indivisula scientific facts have been accurately
presented by Wells.
Don

Alexanian, Moorad wrote:
> I have not read Icons of Evolution but my understanding is that Wells documented some goofs the advocated of evolutionary theory had made. However, I do agree that one cannot use, say, the Piltdown fiasco as proof that evolutionary theory is wrong.
>
>
>
> Moorad
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Sep 2 20:21:12 2007