>
> To Lloyd and John,
>
> One doesn't have to get into issues of simultaneity in order to
> find and understand my objection to Lloyd's claim that Dawkins
> subscribed to his Claim #6. One merely has to look at what
> Claim #6 entails ("all biological differences" and "all speciation")
> to see that the quote provided from Dawkins does not establish
> that Dawkins subscribes to that view, and actually provides
> evidence that Dawkins disagrees with that view.
All right, folks, I'm going to turn this problem around.
To: Wesley Elsberry, John Rylander, Greg Billock, and anyone else who
whats to get involved:
Produce a list of statements, 1 through n (however many are needed), in
simple declarative English that non-specialists can understand, of just
what *is* the content of evolution. If possible, keep my #1 through #5 and
go on from there. If Dawkins, Mayr, Gould, et al. have different views,
then show what the differences are.
When Dawkins says that evolution is true, what is he saying? (Divide it up
into sub-statements so we can ascertain what is true, what may be false,
and what is indeterminate).
The creation/evolutioon debate is exceedingly messy because there's no
clarity about what is being claimed and what is being excluded. I also
have the strong impression that the term "evolution" is a portmanteau one
-- if you find a proponent in a falsehood or insupportable claim, he'll
slide away by saying "that's not what I meant," and retreat to a more
defensible position.
So, go to it. Just what does Dawkins, for example, believe?
Lloyd Eby