>I have a PhD in a biomedical science and I have done cell biology and
>molecular genetics research for more than 15 yrs. I think that this
>background would give me some qualification to evaluate much of the data
>for and against evolution. But I assiduously avoid doing so. The field is
>sufficiently complex and deep that I would be in constant fear of making
>important errors of opinion.
Who is qualified to speak about evolution? Someone with a PhD in two dozen
fields from taphonomy to molecular biology? Then there's statistics,
probability,
and other mathematical disciplines. Philosophy and history of science are
indispensable of course. The would-be evolutionist should have studied religion
as well; one can hardly function without an understanding of the creationists.
Geology, physics, chemistry--it might be more efficient to list the fields
which
are *not* relevant. Languages are always important; I would hesitate to debate
about Haeckel, Lamarck, Lucretius or Empedocles with someone who was fluent...
Anyway, I think Steve should just jump in and take his lumps.
--Cliff Lundberg ~ San Francisco ~ cliff@noe.com