>> Gould does not describe people like Walcott as deceitful. But
>> he forcefully makes the case that our preconceptions can have
>> a powerful influence on coloring our perception of reality.
>> And when the facts didn't fit they simply closed their minds.
>> They refused to accept the now established fact that the testimony
>> of the fossils told a very different history of life then the
>> history they expected. I admire honest scholars like Stephen
>> Jay Gould who have attempted to set the record straight. Perhaps
>> now we will all know that the perception we all learned about the
>> fossil record derived from Darwin's expectations were false.
Much as I like his writing, the general concensus now seems to be that
Gould considerably oversold his case. A number of the "wierdo fossils"
have since been fitted into some of the existing phyla, and one of them,
Wiwaxia, is now in the same place Walcott put it in in 1911.
So the truth lies somewhere between the Walcott and Gould viewpoints,
and may, for all I know, end up closer to the Walcott end of the
spectrum. I have a couple of posts saved which go into more detail,
email me if you want them.
-- Jim Foley Symbios Logic, Fort Collins, COJim.Foley@symbios.com (303) 223-5100 x9765 I've got a plan so cunning you could put a tail on it and call it a weasel. -- Edmund Blackadder