BH:===
>> As usual, I'm having a difficult time deciphering your comments.
>
RL:===
>I'm not supprised Brian it was a question.
>
You're so brilliant.
BH:===
>> My point, which you have not addressed, is that your quote characterizes
>> Darwinism as involving only pure chance. This is a gross mis-
>> characterization.
>
>What quote you are referring to? My last quote was Denton not
>Darwin. I believe Jim made a quote from Darwin. I may very well be
>mistaken please provide me with the quote so that I may be sure what we
>are talking about.
>
Good grief, Randy, I'm referring to your quote of Denton, the quote
that characterizes Darwinism as pure chance, the quote that so
mis-characterizes Darwinism that it falls just short of being an
out right lie. You I can excuse on account of ignorance. Denton
should know better.
>Now how about an answer to my question?
>
Previously I mentioned something to you about good form. It is good
form to clarify a question before launching in. This is what I attempted
to do. You chose to try to take advantage of this with all your don't you
understand, answer the question crap. Well that's fine, but your
subsequent comments showed that in fact I had understood your
question and have answered it. Now its time for you to address my
point. Your quote of Denton mischaracterizes Darwinism. Are you
going to retract it?
Brian Harper | "If you don't understand
Associate Professor | something and want to
Applied Mechanics | sound profound, use the
The Ohio State University | word 'entropy'"
| -- Morrowitz
Bastion for the naturalistic |
rulers of science |