--part1_293265a3.2482a465_boundary
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline
Return-path: Huxter4441@aol.com
From: Huxter4441@aol.com
Full-name: Huxter4441
Message-ID: <293265a3.248161c3@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 11:29:07 EDT
Subject: Re: evolution archive list
To: Bertvan@aol.com, evolution@calvin.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 13
In a message dated 5/29/99 3:04:33 PM !!!First Boot!!!, Bertvan@aol.com
writes:
<< Bertvan:
In his latest book, At Home in the Universe or Nature's Destiny, (I can't
remember which is his and which is Kauffman's book) Denton says he is not a
creationst. Do you not take his word for it? >>
***** Why should anyone take his word? In EATIC, he used 14 year-old
cytochrome-c data to prop up his 'typology' approach, despite the fact that
as recently as 4-5 years before it EATIC was published, there was a major
re-evaluation of that data with additional data using more stringent methods
of analysis that demonstrated that the 'evolutionist view' of phylogeny was
correct. I consider that a major error of omission, one that should not be
taken lightly, especially when he was attempting to bolster his
anti-evolutionary claims 'scientifically..
--part1_293265a3.2482a465_boundary--