Chris
I'm going to print Stephen's post out and read it closely, but it *already*
looks like Hoyle is misrepresenting evolutionary theory. As I said once
before, it appears that Hoyle is a better mathematician than thinker, but
we'll see. It's easy to "prove" something won't work if you misrepresent it,
so I don't expect Hoyle's work to do much more than perhaps get the
evolutionists to develop the *real* mathematics of evolution. This, in
itself, of course, would be a very good thing. But, if Hoyle *has* greatly
misrepresented either the theory or empirical facts that it's based on,
etc., it may not even stimulate the development of a better mathematical
treatment, because too many evolutionists will simply argue that what Hoyle
has done is irrelevant. We'll see.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 23 2000 - 17:27:09 EST