Evolution - November 2000
By Date

Starting: Wed Nov 01 2000 - 00:48:09 EST
Ending: Thu Nov 30 2000 - 20:09:53 EST

• Re: The blind leading the blind? Pseudo intellectuals a la carte! Chris Cogan (Thu Nov 30 2000 - 19:08:06 EST)
• Re: Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) DNAunion@aol.com (Thu Nov 30 2000 - 13:30:22 EST)
• Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Richard Wein (Thu Nov 30 2000 - 05:17:10 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection Ralph Krumdieck (Thu Nov 30 2000 - 03:30:44 EST)
• Re: Que sera, sera!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Susan Cogan (Wed Nov 29 2000 - 12:54:41 EST)
• Re: Que sera, sera!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ralph Krumdieck (Wed Nov 29 2000 - 12:02:52 EST)
• Fw: Why? there ain't no why to it (for you). silk (Wed Nov 29 2000 - 08:33:36 EST)
• Que sera, sera!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! silk (Wed Nov 29 2000 - 05:39:20 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #5 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) AutismUK@aol.com (Wed Nov 29 2000 - 06:10:07 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #4 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) AutismUK@aol.com (Wed Nov 29 2000 - 06:10:00 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #5 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Tue Nov 28 2000 - 17:26:57 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #4 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Tue Nov 28 2000 - 17:26:06 EST)
• Re: The blind leading the blind? Pseudo intellectuals a la carte! Susan Cogan (Tue Nov 28 2000 - 15:12:20 EST)
• For whatever it's worth! silk (Tue Nov 28 2000 - 05:24:04 EST)
• The blind leading the blind? Pseudo intellectuals a la carte! silk (Tue Nov 28 2000 - 05:19:05 EST)
• Chance and Selection Bertvan@aol.com (Tue Nov 28 2000 - 08:04:52 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #3 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) AutismUK@aol.com (Tue Nov 28 2000 - 02:47:36 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #2 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) AutismUK@aol.com (Tue Nov 28 2000 - 02:47:25 EST)
• Re: Fwd: [METAVIEWS] 098: Intelligent Design Coming Clean, Part 2 of 4 Susan Cogan (Mon Nov 27 2000 - 17:56:43 EST)
• Re: Vague appeals to OST (retraction - kind of) DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Nov 27 2000 - 17:16:12 EST)
• RE: ID and Creationism Susan Cogan (Mon Nov 27 2000 - 15:57:05 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism Susan Cogan (Mon Nov 27 2000 - 15:37:25 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism Stephen E. Jones (Sun Nov 26 2000 - 16:24:30 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #2 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Sun Nov 26 2000 - 16:36:00 EST)
• Re: chance and selection Stephen E. Jones (Sun Nov 26 2000 - 17:00:20 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #3 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Sun Nov 26 2000 - 16:36:56 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection Ralph Krumdieck (Sun Nov 26 2000 - 02:24:07 EST)
• Chance and Selection Bertvan@aol.com (Sat Nov 25 2000 - 10:15:04 EST)
• knowing everything Susan Brassfield Cogan (Sat Nov 25 2000 - 07:23:59 EST)
• Re: Vague appeals to OST Parts 1-6 AutismUK@aol.com (Sat Nov 25 2000 - 04:25:41 EST)
• Re: Vague appeals to OST Parts 1-6 DNAunion@aol.com (Sat Nov 25 2000 - 02:57:29 EST)
• Re: Vague appeals to OST (retraction - kind of) AutismUK@aol.com (Sat Nov 25 2000 - 02:52:27 EST)
• Asking a small favour from you sinem gungor (Sat Nov 25 2000 - 02:50:05 EST)
• Vague appeals to OST Parts 1-6 AutismUK@aol.com (Sat Nov 25 2000 - 02:26:14 EST)
• Vague appeals to OST (retraction - kind of) DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 24 2000 - 17:55:54 EST)
• Misc stuff on entropy, tendency, life DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 24 2000 - 17:24:04 EST)
• Vague appeals to OST (part 6) DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 24 2000 - 17:18:42 EST)
• Vague appeals to OST (part 5) DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 24 2000 - 17:16:04 EST)
• Vauge appeals to OST (part 4) DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 24 2000 - 17:13:35 EST)
• Vague appeals to OST (part 3) DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 24 2000 - 17:12:07 EST)
• Vauge appeals to OST (part 2) DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 24 2000 - 17:07:59 EST)
• Vague appeals to OST (part 1) DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 24 2000 - 17:03:45 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism AutismUK@aol.com (Fri Nov 24 2000 - 15:37:34 EST)
• (no subject) silk (Fri Nov 24 2000 - 14:01:09 EST)
• New info on Kenneth Hsu: Daniel Gish (Fri Nov 24 2000 - 12:38:13 EST)
• Re: Politeness AutismUK@aol.com (Fri Nov 24 2000 - 12:31:47 EST)
• Re: Politeness AutismUK@aol.com (Fri Nov 24 2000 - 12:31:37 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #1 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) AutismUK@aol.com (Fri Nov 24 2000 - 05:52:23 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection Chris Cogan (Thu Nov 23 2000 - 21:00:02 EST)
• Asking a small favour from you sinem gungor (Thu Nov 23 2000 - 17:39:56 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Thu Nov 23 2000 - 11:53:49 EST)
• Chance and Selection Bertvan@aol.com (Thu Nov 23 2000 - 09:38:06 EST)
• Dembski's confusion over specified complexity Richard Wein (Thu Nov 23 2000 - 03:54:50 EST)
• Re: Politeness DNAunion@aol.com (Thu Nov 23 2000 - 02:03:36 EST)
• Re: Politeness DNAunion@aol.com (Thu Nov 23 2000 - 02:02:35 EST)
• Re: Politeness DNAunion@aol.com (Thu Nov 23 2000 - 01:41:08 EST)
• Re: Politeness DNAunion@aol.com (Thu Nov 23 2000 - 01:34:30 EST)
• Re: Politeness DNAunion@aol.com (Thu Nov 23 2000 - 01:19:35 EST)
• Re: ID and YEC in" Geotimes" Keith Littleton (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 19:56:03 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #1 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 17:58:28 EST)
• Re: Politeness AutismUK@aol.com (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 17:23:01 EST)
• Re: ID and YEC in" Geotimes" DNAunion@aol.com (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 16:56:01 EST)
• ID and YEC in" Geotimes" Keith Littleton (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 16:30:06 EST)
• Re: Time window for OOL (part 4) DNAunion@aol.com (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 15:03:40 EST)
• Re: Time window for OOL (part 4) Brian D Harper (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 17:18:04 EST)
• Time window for OOL (part 5) DNAunion@aol.com (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 14:02:06 EST)
• Time window for OOL (part 4) DNAunion@aol.com (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 13:58:18 EST)
• Time window for OOL (part 3) DNAunion@aol.com (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 13:53:53 EST)
• Time window for OOL (part 2) DNAunion@aol.com (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 13:49:33 EST)
• Time window for OOL (part 1) DNAunion@aol.com (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 13:42:47 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism Susan Cogan (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 13:17:19 EST)
• Re: Politeness DNAunion@aol.com (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 12:21:04 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism bill r wald (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 12:21:04 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism Susan Cogan (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 10:38:14 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection Ralph Krumdieck (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 02:46:48 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism bill r wald (Wed Nov 22 2000 - 02:23:07 EST)
• Fwd: [METAVIEWS] 098: Intelligent Design Coming Clean, Part 4 of 4 Stephen E. Jones (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 17:53:29 EST)
• Fwd: [METAVIEWS] 098: Intelligent Design Coming Clean, Part 3 of 4 Stephen E. Jones (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 17:52:58 EST)
• Fwd: [METAVIEWS] 098: Intelligent Design Coming Clean, Part 2 of 4 Stephen E. Jones (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 17:52:38 EST)
• Fwd: [METAVIEWS] 098: Intelligent Design Coming Clean, Part 1 of 4 Stephen E. Jones (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 17:52:20 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 17:52:02 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism Susan Cogan (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 15:05:20 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism bill r wald (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 14:40:23 EST)
• Re: Tendency vs. behavior DNAunion@aol.com (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 13:45:14 EST)
• Chance and Selection Bertvan@aol.com (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 13:19:49 EST)
• RE: Politeness Nelson Alonso (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 11:41:03 EST)
• Re: Politeness li dorris (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 08:55:58 EST)
• Re: Politeness Richard Wein (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 06:50:30 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism AutismUK@aol.com (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 04:25:49 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics AutismUK@aol.com (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 04:25:48 EST)
• Re: Politeness AutismUK@aol.com (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 04:25:46 EST)
• Re: chance and selection Ralph Krumdieck (Tue Nov 21 2000 - 02:19:35 EST)
• chance and selection Bertvan@aol.com (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 18:54:53 EST)
• Re: chance and selection Susan Cogan (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 17:44:51 EST)
• Re: Overcome (and analogies) DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 17:08:06 EST)
• Re: self-replicating molecules DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 16:51:04 EST)
• Re: self-replicating molecules DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 16:35:06 EST)
• Re: Fw: Pseudo Intellectuals & the horse they rode in on! Susan Cogan (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 15:23:01 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics bill r wald (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 12:58:42 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism bill r wald (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 13:25:53 EST)
• self-replicating molecules Susan Cogan (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 15:13:52 EST)
• RE: Politeness Nelson Alonso (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 14:28:15 EST)
• RE: Politeness Nelson Alonso (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 14:15:10 EST)
• RE: Politeness li dorris (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 13:59:45 EST)
• RE: Politeness Nelson Alonso (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 12:51:46 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 12:37:48 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 11:39:48 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Nov 20 2000 - 11:08:16 EST)
• chance and selection Bertvan@aol.com (Sun Nov 19 2000 - 11:56:59 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism Susan Brassfield Cogan (Sun Nov 19 2000 - 10:51:48 EST)
• chance and selection Bertvan@aol.com (Sun Nov 19 2000 - 08:46:07 EST)
• Fw: Pseudo Intellectuals & the horse they rode in on! silk (Sat Nov 18 2000 - 14:15:34 EST)
• Re: chance and selection Ralph Krumdieck (Sun Nov 19 2000 - 00:37:32 EST)
• chance and selection Bertvan@aol.com (Sat Nov 18 2000 - 16:51:02 EST)
• Re: chance and selection Susan Brassfield Cogan (Sat Nov 18 2000 - 14:33:42 EST)
• Re: Report by Jonathan Wells of tour of Arkansas, Kansas, Washington Huxter4441@aol.com (Sat Nov 18 2000 - 12:27:10 EST)
• Re: Report by Jonathan Wells of tour of Arkansas, Kansas, Washington Huxter4441@aol.com (Sat Nov 18 2000 - 12:25:04 EST)
• chance and selection Bertvan@aol.com (Sat Nov 18 2000 - 12:09:17 EST)
• Re: Politeness AutismUK@aol.com (Sat Nov 18 2000 - 11:20:55 EST)
• Re: we have witnessed no new species emerge in the wild? (was Schutzenberger) Susan Brassfield Cogan (Sat Nov 18 2000 - 09:48:15 EST)
• Re: New list? Susan Brassfield Cogan (Sat Nov 18 2000 - 09:23:06 EST)
• Re: New list? Richard Wein (Sat Nov 18 2000 - 08:50:09 EST)
• Politeness Richard Wein (Sat Nov 18 2000 - 08:40:19 EST)
• Re: chance and selection Susan Brassfield Cogan (Fri Nov 17 2000 - 20:06:06 EST)
• chance and selection Bertvan@aol.com (Fri Nov 17 2000 - 18:39:11 EST)
• Recent "quality" posts. David Bradbury (Fri Nov 17 2000 - 17:44:53 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) bill r wald (Fri Nov 17 2000 - 14:58:46 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism bill r wald (Fri Nov 17 2000 - 14:16:35 EST)
• Re: chance and selection Ralph Krumdieck (Fri Nov 17 2000 - 14:27:33 EST)
• chance and selection Bertvan@aol.com (Fri Nov 17 2000 - 13:07:13 EST)
• Re: chance and selection Ralph Krumdieck (Fri Nov 17 2000 - 10:44:10 EST)
• Re: chance and selection Susan Cogan (Fri Nov 17 2000 - 10:42:35 EST)
• chance and selection Bertvan@aol.com (Fri Nov 17 2000 - 09:57:30 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) Stephen E. Jones (Thu Nov 16 2000 - 21:45:31 EST)
• Re: we have witnessed no new species emerge in the wild? (was Schutzenberger) Stephen E. Jones (Thu Nov 16 2000 - 20:16:05 EST)
• Last 1 on attributing to wrong people? DNAunion@aol.com (Thu Nov 16 2000 - 22:15:45 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism Stephen E. Jones (Wed Nov 15 2000 - 20:49:34 EST)
• Re: Tendency vs. behavior DNAunion@aol.com (Thu Nov 16 2000 - 17:56:49 EST)
• Attributing statements to the wrong people DNAunion@aol.com (Thu Nov 16 2000 - 14:54:31 EST)
• Re: Overcome (and analogies) Richard Wein (Wed Nov 15 2000 - 15:46:46 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu (Wed Nov 15 2000 - 15:28:56 EST)
• Overcome (and analogies) DNAunion@aol.com (Wed Nov 15 2000 - 14:13:03 EST)
• Re: Tendency vs. behavior Richard Wein (Wed Nov 15 2000 - 13:14:36 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics" Richard Wein (Wed Nov 15 2000 - 12:59:13 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Tue Nov 14 2000 - 22:46:06 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Tue Nov 14 2000 - 21:36:34 EST)
• Tendency vs. behavior DNAunion@aol.com (Tue Nov 14 2000 - 21:16:54 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Richard Wein (Tue Nov 14 2000 - 05:09:33 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 21:28:35 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Chris Cogan (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 21:12:27 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 18:46:28 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 17:34:59 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Richard Wein (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 16:36:25 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' (was How to prove supernaturalism?) AutismUK@aol.com (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 16:30:03 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics AutismUK@aol.com (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 15:52:12 EST)
• Re: Rules of physics violated? David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 15:33:21 EST)
• Re: None dare call it treason! Susan Cogan (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 13:26:50 EST)
• None dare call it treason! silk (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 07:56:04 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' (was How to prove supernaturalism?) bill r wald (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 12:45:35 EST)
• Re: Rules of physics violated? bill r wald (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 13:41:55 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Richard Wein (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 06:16:44 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Richard Wein (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 06:11:59 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' (was How to prove supernaturalism?) AutismUK@aol.com (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 05:39:05 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' (was How to prove supernaturalism?) AutismUK@aol.com (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 05:39:02 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 00:58:05 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 00:02:34 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Stephen E. Jones (Sun Nov 12 2000 - 18:25:26 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 00:10:42 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Mon Nov 13 2000 - 00:02:54 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Sun Nov 12 2000 - 23:07:12 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Chris Cogan (Sun Nov 12 2000 - 20:47:46 EST)
• Re: Cold fusion is a fact DNAunion@aol.com (Sun Nov 12 2000 - 15:52:32 EST)
• Re: Cold fusion is a fact Susan Brassfield Cogan (Sun Nov 12 2000 - 15:25:41 EST)
• Cold fusion is a fact DNAunion@aol.com (Sun Nov 12 2000 - 14:36:45 EST)
• Rules of physics violated? DNAunion@aol.com (Sun Nov 12 2000 - 14:21:06 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Sun Nov 12 2000 - 12:35:10 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Sun Nov 12 2000 - 12:34:39 EST)
• Re: [creationevolutiondebate] Phil Johnson on the Second Law Susan Brassfield Cogan (Sun Nov 12 2000 - 10:41:00 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Sun Nov 12 2000 - 01:57:10 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Sun Nov 12 2000 - 01:55:08 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Sat Nov 11 2000 - 22:47:23 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Sat Nov 11 2000 - 21:31:52 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Sat Nov 11 2000 - 21:16:51 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics AutismUK@aol.com (Sat Nov 11 2000 - 19:02:41 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics AutismUK@aol.com (Sat Nov 11 2000 - 19:02:38 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics bill r wald (Sat Nov 11 2000 - 15:36:04 EST)
• [creationevolutiondebate] Phil Johnson on the Second Law Bertvan@aol.com (Sat Nov 11 2000 - 15:54:03 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Sat Nov 11 2000 - 13:39:50 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Sat Nov 11 2000 - 12:56:07 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Sat Nov 11 2000 - 11:59:36 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu (Sat Nov 11 2000 - 08:07:11 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics AutismUK@aol.com (Sat Nov 11 2000 - 04:49:43 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics AutismUK@aol.com (Sat Nov 11 2000 - 04:49:45 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu (Fri Nov 10 2000 - 23:56:30 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 10 2000 - 23:23:57 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 10 2000 - 23:22:34 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 10 2000 - 22:55:38 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 10 2000 - 22:27:52 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 10 2000 - 22:19:52 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 10 2000 - 21:24:28 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Fri Nov 10 2000 - 21:10:54 EST)
• Re: Dembski's `The Design Inference' peer reviewed? (was Examples of natural ... Huxter4441@aol.com (Fri Nov 10 2000 - 15:15:03 EST)
• Re: Dembski's `The Design Inference' peer reviewed? (was Examples of natural ... AutismUK@aol.com (Fri Nov 10 2000 - 05:46:47 EST)
• Re: Ultimate premises/Arguing for aguments sake! Chris Cogan (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 22:45:38 EST)
• Re: Dembski's `The Design Inference' peer reviewed? (was Examples of natural selection generating CSI) Stephen E. Jones (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 19:15:58 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Richard Wein (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 20:08:33 EST)
• RE: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Nelson Alonso (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 18:54:45 EST)
• RE: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Chris Cogan (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 17:24:07 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Chris Cogan (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 17:15:42 EST)
• RE: Figure this one out! I dare you! nelson alonzo Nelson Alonso (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 16:44:05 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 14:51:06 EST)
• Re: Ultimate premises Chris Cogan (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 14:45:49 EST)
• Re: Examples of natural selection generating CSI bill r wald (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 12:19:29 EST)
• Figure this one out! I dare you! nelson alonzo silk (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 08:11:05 EST)
• Ultimate premises/Arguing for aguments sake! silk (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 02:21:05 EST)
• RE: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Nelson Alonso (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 13:21:23 EST)
• RE: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Nelson Alonso (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 11:06:08 EST)
• Re: Ultimate premises Chris Cogan (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 07:30:09 EST)
• Oops. Wrongly posted post. Chris Cogan (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 07:23:52 EST)
• Re: choice as part of the design Chris Cogan (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 07:17:30 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Richard Wein (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 07:11:34 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics AutismUK@aol.com (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 05:59:26 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics AutismUK@aol.com (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 05:59:25 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' (was How to prove supernaturalism?) AutismUK@aol.com (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 05:59:24 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Richard Wein (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 04:33:17 EST)
• Re: Examples of natural selection generating CSI Ivar Ylvisaker (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 01:32:24 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu (Thu Nov 09 2000 - 01:11:46 EST)
• RE: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Nelson Alonso (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 22:36:28 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 22:34:15 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 22:28:29 EST)
• RE: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Nelson Alonso (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 21:17:07 EST)
• Re: Report by Jonathan Wells of tour of Arkansas, Kansas, Washington Stephen E. Jones (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 21:15:01 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 21:10:22 EST)
• RE: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Nelson Alonso (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 21:10:52 EST)
• Re: Ultimate premises Stephen E. Jones (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 21:06:09 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 20:52:59 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 20:44:18 EST)
• ID thinking Nelson Alonso (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 19:37:16 EST)
• Re: Open Minds Please! Susan Cogan (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 17:07:53 EST)
• Re: choice as part of the design bill r wald (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 14:30:33 EST)
• Open Minds Please! silk (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 11:43:11 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Richard Wein (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 07:19:07 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics AutismUK@aol.com (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 04:41:25 EST)
• Re: Report by Jonathan Wells of tour of Arkansas, Kansas, Washington AutismUK@aol.com (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 04:41:23 EST)
• Ultimate premises Chris Cogan (Wed Nov 08 2000 - 00:00:41 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Tue Nov 07 2000 - 23:17:52 EST)
• Re: choice as part of the design Stephen E. Jones (Tue Nov 07 2000 - 22:21:22 EST)
• Bank of England commemorates Charles Darwin Richard Wein (Tue Nov 07 2000 - 20:56:13 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Stephen E. Jones (Tue Nov 07 2000 - 20:06:47 EST)
• Re: Report by Jonathan Wells of tour of Arkansas, Kansas, Washington Stephen E. Jones (Tue Nov 07 2000 - 20:14:51 EST)
• Re: Report by Jonathan Wells of tour of Arkansas, Kansas, Washington Stephen E. Jones (Mon Nov 06 2000 - 19:05:36 EST)
• Re: when natural selection pumps its complexity up to the next level (was Schutzenberger) Stephen E. Jones (Mon Nov 06 2000 - 18:50:46 EST)
• Re: Great web site Susan Cogan (Tue Nov 07 2000 - 17:40:34 EST)
• Re: Examples of natural selection generating CSI Richard Wein (Tue Nov 07 2000 - 07:06:07 EST)
• Re: Great web site Huxter4441@aol.com (Tue Nov 07 2000 - 09:15:21 EST)
• Re: Great web site Susan Brassfield Cogan (Tue Nov 07 2000 - 08:34:40 EST)
• Re: Examples of natural selection generating CSI Ivar Ylvisaker (Tue Nov 07 2000 - 01:12:28 EST)
• Re: Great web site Chris Cogan (Mon Nov 06 2000 - 23:56:59 EST)
• cause of gravitation (was Re: Great web site) David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu (Mon Nov 06 2000 - 23:44:54 EST)
• Re: Great web site DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Nov 06 2000 - 23:41:41 EST)
• Re: Great web site Susan Brassfield Cogan (Mon Nov 06 2000 - 21:19:06 EST)
• Re: Great web site Huxter4441@aol.com (Mon Nov 06 2000 - 20:08:05 EST)
• Re: Great web site DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Nov 06 2000 - 18:36:40 EST)
• Re: Great web site Susan Cogan (Mon Nov 06 2000 - 17:45:24 EST)
• Great web site Bertvan@aol.com (Mon Nov 06 2000 - 17:05:21 EST)
• Re: Examples of natural selection generating CSI Richard Wein (Mon Nov 06 2000 - 08:05:38 EST)
• Re: Examples of natural selection generating CSI Ivar Ylvisaker (Sun Nov 05 2000 - 17:00:09 EST)
• Re: Report by Jonathan Wells of tour of Arkansas, K... Huxter4441@aol.com (Sun Nov 05 2000 - 13:23:10 EST)
• Nonsense & its double negatives confusing itself! silk (Sun Nov 05 2000 - 02:57:19 EST)
• Re: Nothing comes from nothing or does it? DNAunion@aol.com (Sat Nov 04 2000 - 14:52:01 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics DNAunion@aol.com (Sat Nov 04 2000 - 14:22:20 EST)
• Nothing comes from nothing or does it? silk (Sat Nov 04 2000 - 13:03:17 EST)
• Re: Examples of natural selection generating CSI Richard Wein (Sat Nov 04 2000 - 09:09:27 EST)
• Re: Examples of natural selection generating CSI Ivar Ylvisaker (Sat Nov 04 2000 - 00:51:33 EST)
• Re: choice as part of the design Tedd Hadley (Fri Nov 03 2000 - 16:25:33 EST)
• Re: Phil Johnson on the Second Law of Thermodynamics Tedd Hadley (Fri Nov 03 2000 - 16:04:29 EST)
• Re: choice as part of the design Chris Cogan (Thu Nov 02 2000 - 23:28:23 EST)
• hi Bertvan@aol.com (Thu Nov 02 2000 - 18:44:10 EST)
• Re: Report by Jonathan Wells of tour of Arkansas, K... Stephen E. Jones (Thu Nov 02 2000 - 18:43:26 EST)
• Re: Nit wits & lollipops! Chris Cogan (Thu Nov 02 2000 - 13:46:31 EST)
• monkey & the scientist? silk (Thu Nov 02 2000 - 12:18:47 EST)
• Nit wits & lollipops! silk (Thu Nov 02 2000 - 07:20:52 EST)
• Rearrange the data to suit your purposes & you can prove anything! silk (Thu Nov 02 2000 - 03:47:01 EST)
• Re: Examples of natural selection generating CSI Richard Wein (Thu Nov 02 2000 - 05:17:39 EST)
• Re: Examples of natural selection generating CSI Ivar Ylvisaker (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 23:56:52 EST)
• Re: ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who or wh... Chris Cogan (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 22:50:29 EST)
• Re: ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who or wh... Susan Cogan (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 15:17:06 EST)
• Re: New list? Susan Cogan (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 15:18:41 EST)
• Re: Jonathan Wells' new book Icons of Evolution: The Cambrian Explosion . Huxter4441@aol.com (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 14:48:38 EST)
• correction (re: split between NWM and OWM) Huxter4441@aol.com (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 14:17:20 EST)
• Re: ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who or wh... bill r wald (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 12:34:40 EST)
• choice as part of the design Bertvan@aol.com (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 13:18:23 EST)
• Re: New list? Brian D Harper (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 12:24:14 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' (was How to prove supernaturalism?) AutismUK@aol.com (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 05:24:32 EST)
• Re: ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who or wh... Richard Wein (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 04:55:41 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Richard Wein (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 04:52:14 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Chris Cogan (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 01:45:48 EST)
• Re: ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who or wh... Chris Cogan (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 01:14:16 EST)
• Re: ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who or what he/it is) Chris Cogan (Wed Nov 01 2000 - 00:48:17 EST)

Last message date: Thu Nov 30 2000 - 20:09:53 EST
Archived on: Thu Nov 30 2000 - 20:09:56 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 30 2000 - 20:09:56 EST