On Tue, 16 Apr 1996 08:12:43 -0700 you wrote to Denis O. Lamoureux:
[...]
PN>You'll never find Goodwin putting much weight on common descent.
>To his mind, it represents exactly the wrong kind of theory for
>biology. One postulates unknown common ancestors as the original
>loci of typical forms, where (say) the vertebrate body plan "just
>appeared in a common ancestor" (1994: 146).
Yet it was precisely this "common descent" evidenced by a nested
hierarchy of forms, that Eldredge recently claimed in his debate with
Phil, was *the* essential claim of Darwinist macro-evolution. If
significant professsors of biology, like Goodwin and Eldredge, cannot
even agree with each other over *central* claims of their theory, then
why should laymen believe it?
[...]
PN>But please stop throwing your weight around as an "expert" and
>lecturing people about the primary literature, etc. Yes, it's
>important that amateurs get the science right and do their best to
>educate themselves. But my diss. keeps me up to my neck in the
>primary literature -- the same literature you're citing -- and I
>just don't read the evidence as you do. I looked up all those
>references you sent to Plantinga (cost me a whole morning). A lot
>of good information about signalling molecules (e.g., sonic
>hedgehog), but nothing about how one viably transforms distinct
>complex morphologies. And the latter problem, I think we'll agree,
>is what evolution is all about.
>
>So, come on: a moratorium on the speeches about the superiority of
>those at the bench vs. the hoi polloi. Let's stick to the evidence and
>how best to understand it.
Hear, hear! :-)
God bless.
Steve
----------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Jones ,--_|\ sjones@iinet.net.au |
| 3 Hawker Ave / Oz \ http://www.iinet.net.au/~sjones/ |
| Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ phone +61 9 448 7439. (These are |
| Perth, Australia v my opinions, not my employer's) |
----------------------------------------------------------------