Bertvan@aol.com writes
in message <30.57d16f1.265c5e6e@aol.com>:
> http://www.edge.org/documents/ThirdCulture/d-Contents.html
>
> I've been reading The Third Culture cited by Tedd, in which
> Margulis said she was a Darwinist, but argued against Neo
> Darwinism. Thought maybe I'd find definitions of the terms.
> The "evolutionists" present a wide spectrum of "facts" they each
> insist laymen accept as scientific truth. Most of all I am
> enjoyng what some of the evolutionists say about each other.
>
> Lynn Margulis: Richard Dawkins epitomizes my comments about how
> scientists rationalize. In his televised response to the Gaia
> hypothesis, he said, and I quote: "The idea [of Gaia] is not dangerous
> or distressing except to academic scientists who value the truth." That
> quote captures the arrogance of Dawkins. I invited him to come and
> discuss Gaia ideas with Lovelock and me, and he declined even a
> telephone conversation. I would have happily arranged such a trip and a
> meaningful idea-tournament with Jim, as Dawkins knew. He prefers to take
> potshots instead of actually discussing the details of Gaia. When he
> says Gaia is "dangerous and distressing to scientists who value the
> truth," he's talking about himself. Gaia is dangerous and distressing to
> him because, unlike the rest of us, he values the truth. The inference
> of his statement simply exposes his solipsism.
> Margulis
Yech! Also read what Dawkin's says about her. Let's remember
that there is no rule that says scientists can't behave like
human beings.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 23 2000 - 18:58:24 EDT