Evolution - December 2000
By Date

Starting: Fri Dec 01 2000 - 01:44:27 EST
Ending: Sun Dec 31 2000 - 10:15:12 EST

• Re: Epistemological standards Stephen E. Jones (Sun Dec 31 2000 - 10:12:07 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) Stephen E. Jones (Sun Dec 31 2000 - 10:04:55 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories (was: we have witnessed no new species emerge in the wild?) Stephen E. Jones (Sun Dec 31 2000 - 09:48:07 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #6 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Sun Dec 31 2000 - 09:40:28 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #6 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Sun Dec 31 2000 - 09:03:47 EST)
• Re: we have witnessed no new species emerge in the wild? 2/2 (was Schutzenberger) Stephen E. Jones (Sun Dec 31 2000 - 07:30:20 EST)
• Re: we have witnessed no new species emerge in the wild? 1/2 (was Schutzenberger) Stephen E. Jones (Sun Dec 31 2000 - 07:15:29 EST)
• Re: the reptilian egg: a `construction project' design argument 1/2 Stephen E. Jones (Sat Dec 30 2000 - 21:56:33 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #5A (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Fri Dec 29 2000 - 07:46:23 EST)
• Re: [METAVIEWS] 098: Intelligent Design Coming Clean, Part 2 of 4 Stephen E. Jones (Thu Dec 28 2000 - 21:19:50 EST)
• Re: the reptilian egg: a `construction project' design argument 2/2 Stephen E. Jones (Sat Dec 30 2000 - 21:56:59 EST)
• Re: Can you find more errors (was Daniel's 70 weeks #6) AutismUK@aol.com (Thu Dec 28 2000 - 04:23:06 EST)
• Re: The Baddeley secret that many don't want to hear about AutismUK@aol.com (Thu Dec 28 2000 - 04:23:08 EST)
• Re: Oops Chris Cogan (Wed Dec 27 2000 - 18:11:30 EST)
• Re: [creationevolutiondebate] We don't have all the answers yet, so why must ... Chris Cogan (Wed Dec 27 2000 - 17:45:39 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) bill r wald (Wed Dec 27 2000 - 13:12:16 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) bill r wald (Wed Dec 27 2000 - 13:21:12 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) Susan Brassfield Cogan (Wed Dec 27 2000 - 10:19:04 EST)
• Re: [METAVIEWS] Jones getting stuck when he can't cut and paste again. Huxter4441@aol.com (Wed Dec 27 2000 - 10:33:31 EST)
• Re: [METAVIEWS] Jones getting stuck when he can't cut and paste again. Richard Wein (Wed Dec 27 2000 - 04:18:41 EST)
• Jones critiques Van Till's critique of Behe Susan Brassfield Cogan (Tue Dec 26 2000 - 19:49:13 EST)
• Supernaturalism's epistemological views as promoting a dark age. (part 2) Chris Cogan (Tue Dec 26 2000 - 18:19:51 EST)
• Supernaturalism's epistemological views as promoting a dark age. (part 1) Chris Cogan (Tue Dec 26 2000 - 18:05:01 EST)
• Re: Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Susan Brassfield Cogan (Tue Dec 26 2000 - 15:08:36 EST)
• Born free? No such animal exists! silk (Tue Dec 26 2000 - 11:17:39 EST)
• Re: [METAVIEWS] Jones getting stuck when he can't cut and paste again. Huxter4441@aol.com (Tue Dec 26 2000 - 10:16:02 EST)
• Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Bertvan@aol.com (Tue Dec 26 2000 - 09:58:23 EST)
• Re: The brain as a complex computer Chris Cogan (Mon Dec 25 2000 - 22:09:20 EST)
• Re: The Baddeley secret that many don't want to hear about Susan Brassfield Cogan (Mon Dec 25 2000 - 21:55:17 EST)
• Re: [METAVIEWS] 098: Intelligent Design Coming Clean, Part 2 of 4 Stephen E. Jones (Mon Dec 25 2000 - 22:16:49 EST)
• Re: The Baddeley secret that many don't want to hear about Chris Cogan (Mon Dec 25 2000 - 21:00:36 EST)
• Re: Seasons Greetings & Farewell Stephen E. Jones (Mon Dec 25 2000 - 20:57:43 EST)
• Re: Can you find more errors (was Daniel's 70 weeks #6) Stephen E. Jones (Mon Dec 25 2000 - 20:55:50 EST)
• Re: The Baddeley secret that many don't want to hear about Stephen E. Jones (Mon Dec 25 2000 - 18:04:13 EST)
• The brain as a complex computer Bertvan@aol.com (Mon Dec 25 2000 - 11:03:34 EST)
• Re: chariot of the Gods & misunderstandings! silk (Sun Dec 24 2000 - 08:08:27 EST)
• Scientific studies to investigate biological determinism Bertvan@aol.com (Sun Dec 24 2000 - 17:44:20 EST)
• Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection Bertvan@aol.com (Sun Dec 24 2000 - 15:29:07 EST)
• Re: Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Chris Cogan (Sat Dec 23 2000 - 22:57:08 EST)
• Re: Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Chris Cogan (Sat Dec 23 2000 - 21:53:18 EST)
• Re: A good account of Baylor Chris Cogan (Sat Dec 23 2000 - 21:35:30 EST)
• Re: Definitions of ID Chris Cogan (Sat Dec 23 2000 - 21:10:05 EST)
• Re: chariot of the Gods>>>>>>>>>>> bill r wald (Sat Dec 23 2000 - 12:12:40 EST)
• Re: A good account of Baylor Richard Wein (Sat Dec 23 2000 - 07:42:31 EST)
• Re: A good account of Baylor Susan Brassfield Cogan (Sat Dec 23 2000 - 07:36:31 EST)
• Re: A good account of Baylor AutismUK@aol.com (Sat Dec 23 2000 - 04:35:50 EST)
• chariot of the Gods>>>>>>>>>>> silk (Fri Dec 22 2000 - 07:00:39 EST)
• Re: Historical doctrines a la carte to go! silk (Fri Dec 22 2000 - 03:34:13 EST)
• Re: Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Chris Cogan (Fri Dec 22 2000 - 21:15:34 EST)
• Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Bertvan@aol.com (Fri Dec 22 2000 - 20:00:48 EST)
• A good account of Baylor Bertvan@aol.com (Fri Dec 22 2000 - 17:12:46 EST)
• Methods of quantifying affect Bertvan@aol.com (Fri Dec 22 2000 - 17:09:38 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #1A (was How to prove supernaturalism?) AutismUK@aol.com (Fri Dec 22 2000 - 10:19:36 EST)
• Re: [METAVIEWS] Jones getting stuck when he can't cut and paste again. AutismUK@aol.com (Fri Dec 22 2000 - 10:19:32 EST)
• Re: Methods of quantifying affect Chris Cogan (Thu Dec 21 2000 - 23:14:11 EST)
• Re: Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Chris Cogan (Thu Dec 21 2000 - 12:52:21 EST)
• Methods of quantifying affect Wesley R. Elsberry (Thu Dec 21 2000 - 10:46:08 EST)
• Re: [METAVIEWS] 098: Intelligent Design Coming Clean, Part 2 of 4 Howard J. Van Till (Thu Dec 21 2000 - 08:59:31 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #1A (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Tue Dec 19 2000 - 17:00:39 EST)
• Re: [METAVIEWS] 098: Intelligent Design Coming Clean, Part 2 of 4 Stephen E. Jones (Tue Dec 19 2000 - 07:49:54 EST)
• Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Bertvan@aol.com (Wed Dec 20 2000 - 17:42:00 EST)
• Methods for measuring affect Bertvan@aol.com (Wed Dec 20 2000 - 10:57:09 EST)
• Methods for measuring affect Wesley R. Elsberry (Wed Dec 20 2000 - 09:50:24 EST)
• Re: Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Richard Wein (Wed Dec 20 2000 - 06:14:22 EST)
• Re: Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Richard Wein (Wed Dec 20 2000 - 06:27:21 EST)
• all men were created equal but different, or were they? silk (Wed Dec 20 2000 - 05:15:58 EST)
• Re: Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Chris Cogan (Tue Dec 19 2000 - 22:03:53 EST)
• Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Bertvan@aol.com (Tue Dec 19 2000 - 13:31:40 EST)
• Re: Can you find more errors (was Daniel's 70 weeks #6) AutismUK@aol.com (Tue Dec 19 2000 - 10:16:31 EST)
• Re: Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Chris Cogan (Mon Dec 18 2000 - 22:38:51 EST)
• Re: What about it!??????????? Chris Cogan (Mon Dec 18 2000 - 22:20:48 EST)
• Re: Can you find more errors (was Daniel's 70 weeks #6) Stephen E. Jones (Mon Dec 18 2000 - 18:13:55 EST)
• What about it!??????????? silk (Mon Dec 18 2000 - 09:37:23 EST)
• Re: [METAVIEWS] 098: Intelligent Design Coming Clean, Part 2 of 4 AutismUK@aol.com (Mon Dec 18 2000 - 10:53:40 EST)
• Re: Can you find more errors (was Daniel's 70 weeks #6) AutismUK@aol.com (Mon Dec 18 2000 - 10:53:25 EST)
• Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Bertvan@aol.com (Mon Dec 18 2000 - 10:51:17 EST)
• Re: Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) Richard Wein (Mon Dec 18 2000 - 07:04:20 EST)
• Re: Natural and Supernatural (was Chance and Selection) David Bradbury (Mon Dec 18 2000 - 00:57:45 EST)
• Re: Can you find more errors (was Daniel's 70 weeks #6) Stephen E. Jones (Sun Dec 17 2000 - 18:28:08 EST)
• Re: ID and Creationism Stephen E. Jones (Sun Dec 17 2000 - 18:11:02 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #3B (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Sun Dec 17 2000 - 16:27:21 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #3A (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Sat Dec 16 2000 - 04:14:10 EST)
• Re: Fwd: [METAVIEWS] 098: Intelligent Design Coming Clean, Part 2 of 4 Stephen E. Jones (Thu Dec 14 2000 - 17:42:13 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) Stephen E. Jones (Thu Dec 14 2000 - 15:46:06 EST)
• Don't be alone this Year!!!! OK? AdultChanges (Sat Dec 16 2000 - 16:35:34 EST)
• Re: Epistemological standards Chris Cogan (Fri Dec 15 2000 - 20:51:55 EST)
• Re: Copelston groupies & the horse they rode in on! Chris Cogan (Fri Dec 15 2000 - 20:49:15 EST)
• Re: Copelston groupies & the horse they rode in on! silk (Thu Dec 14 2000 - 11:38:44 EST)
• Re: Copelston groupies & the horse they rode in on! bill r wald (Thu Dec 14 2000 - 10:46:12 EST)
• Re: Epistemological standards AutismUK@aol.com (Thu Dec 14 2000 - 05:44:54 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) silk (Wed Dec 13 2000 - 03:22:09 EST)
• Copelston groupies & the horse they rode in on! silk (Wed Dec 13 2000 - 02:56:15 EST)
• Epistemological standards Chris Cogan (Wed Dec 13 2000 - 22:00:03 EST)
• I am a miracle, difference is I know it, I feel it, I'm rich! silk (Tue Dec 12 2000 - 12:24:48 EST)
• Re: Can you find more errors (was Daniel's 70 weeks #6) AutismUK@aol.com (Tue Dec 12 2000 - 19:12:40 EST)
• Limits on evolution Chris Cogan (Tue Dec 12 2000 - 17:44:41 EST)
• Re: Ancient Chinese 'Bird' Used Feathers to Fly Stephen E. Jones (Tue Dec 12 2000 - 16:27:56 EST)
• Re: Can you find more errors (was Daniel's 70 weeks #6) Stephen E. Jones (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 18:00:00 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #2B (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 17:26:02 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #2A (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 17:25:33 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to i Bertvan@aol.com (Tue Dec 12 2000 - 14:05:08 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to ident Susan Cogan (Tue Dec 12 2000 - 12:35:23 EST)
• Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to ident Bertvan@aol.com (Tue Dec 12 2000 - 12:24:49 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to ident Chris Cogan (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 22:39:45 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to ident Susan Brassfield Cogan (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 22:16:20 EST)
• Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to ident Bertvan@aol.com (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 18:57:33 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) Chris Cogan (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 17:32:47 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to i Chris Cogan (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 17:08:14 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to i Susan Cogan (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 17:42:15 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to i Bertvan@aol.com (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 17:36:50 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories Susan Cogan (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 16:38:51 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need t... AutismUK@aol.com (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 11:42:23 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) Susan Cogan (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 11:15:55 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) Susan Cogan (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 11:13:31 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) Ralph Krumdieck (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 11:07:48 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories (wa... bill r wald (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 11:10:32 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) bill r wald (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 11:30:11 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) Chris Cogan (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 08:50:08 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need t... AutismUK@aol.com (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 05:04:38 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need t... AutismUK@aol.com (Mon Dec 11 2000 - 02:45:33 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories (wa... Chris Cogan (Sun Dec 10 2000 - 23:03:50 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) bill r wald (Sun Dec 10 2000 - 23:04:55 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories (was: we h bill r wald (Sun Dec 10 2000 - 22:37:10 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories (wa... DNAunion@aol.com (Sun Dec 10 2000 - 22:56:02 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories (was: we h David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu (Sun Dec 10 2000 - 18:54:00 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) Stephen E. Jones (Fri Dec 08 2000 - 09:39:22 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories (was: we h bill r wald (Sun Dec 10 2000 - 17:01:04 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories Chris Cogan (Sun Dec 10 2000 - 11:53:20 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories (wa... Chris Cogan (Sun Dec 10 2000 - 11:44:05 EST)
• Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories Bertvan@aol.com (Sun Dec 10 2000 - 12:34:40 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories bill r wald (Sat Dec 09 2000 - 20:12:46 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories (was: we h Chris Cogan (Sat Dec 09 2000 - 21:44:36 EST)
• Re: Complexes a la Carte! Chris Cogan (Sat Dec 09 2000 - 20:50:32 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories Susan Brassfield Cogan (Sat Dec 09 2000 - 16:47:56 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories (wa... DNAunion@aol.com (Sat Dec 09 2000 - 15:28:50 EST)
• Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories (was: we h Bertvan@aol.com (Sat Dec 09 2000 - 15:27:19 EST)
• Re: Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories (was: we have witnessed no new species emerge in the wild?) bill r wald (Sat Dec 09 2000 - 13:21:17 EST)
• Re: Complexes a la Carte! Susan Brassfield Cogan (Sat Dec 09 2000 - 09:08:56 EST)
• Re: Fw: Chicken or the egg? Susan Brassfield Cogan (Sat Dec 09 2000 - 09:00:51 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) Susan Brassfield Cogan (Sat Dec 09 2000 - 08:32:29 EST)
• Complexes a la Carte! silk (Fri Dec 08 2000 - 04:43:32 EST)
• Fw: Chicken or the egg? silk vain (Fri Dec 08 2000 - 03:01:03 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) Brian D Harper (Fri Dec 08 2000 - 20:15:31 EST)
• Re: Chicken or the egg? Chris Cogan (Thu Dec 07 2000 - 21:59:11 EST)
• Re: Fw: Nourishment for overcompensators! Chris Cogan (Thu Dec 07 2000 - 21:55:20 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #6 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Chris Cogan (Thu Dec 07 2000 - 21:19:59 EST)
• Religious Beliefs that *Require* the Falsehood of Scientific Theories (was: we have witnessed no new species emerge in the wild?) Chris Cogan (Thu Dec 07 2000 - 21:06:56 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #6 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Chris Cogan (Thu Dec 07 2000 - 20:43:23 EST)
• Re: Fw: Nourishment for overcompensators! Susan Cogan (Thu Dec 07 2000 - 15:18:04 EST)
• Re: Chicken or the egg? Susan Cogan (Thu Dec 07 2000 - 15:10:37 EST)
• Chicken or the egg? silk (Thu Dec 07 2000 - 05:29:56 EST)
• Fw: Nourishment for overcompensators! silk (Thu Dec 07 2000 - 05:28:26 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #6 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) AutismUK@aol.com (Thu Dec 07 2000 - 02:19:13 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #6 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Wed Dec 06 2000 - 18:07:57 EST)
• Re: we have witnessed no new species emerge in the wild? (was Schutzenberger) Huxter4441@aol.com (Wed Dec 06 2000 - 14:34:43 EST)
• Re: The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything Susan Cogan (Wed Dec 06 2000 - 10:46:47 EST)
• Re: The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything AutismUK@aol.com (Wed Dec 06 2000 - 05:29:38 EST)
• Can you find more errors (was Daniel's 70 weeks #6) AutismUK@aol.com (Wed Dec 06 2000 - 05:29:29 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #6 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) AutismUK@aol.com (Wed Dec 06 2000 - 05:29:34 EST)
• Re: chance and selection Chris Cogan (Tue Dec 05 2000 - 22:57:10 EST)
• Re: Scientists Find Fossils of Man's Earliest Ancestor DNAunion@aol.com (Tue Dec 05 2000 - 22:26:21 EST)
• Re: The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything Chris Cogan (Tue Dec 05 2000 - 19:32:07 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #6 (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Tue Dec 05 2000 - 17:39:51 EST)
• Re: Scientists Find Fossils of Man's Earliest Ancestor Stephen E. Jones (Tue Dec 05 2000 - 16:23:46 EST)
• Re: chance and selection Susan Cogan (Tue Dec 05 2000 - 15:44:34 EST)
• chance and selection Bertvan@aol.com (Tue Dec 05 2000 - 14:20:15 EST)
• Re: we have witnessed no new species emerge in the wild? (was Schutzenberger) Susan Cogan (Tue Dec 05 2000 - 11:22:15 EST)
• The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything Bertvan@aol.com (Tue Dec 05 2000 - 10:57:48 EST)
• Chance and Selection Bertvan@aol.com (Tue Dec 05 2000 - 09:49:36 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Dec 04 2000 - 21:42:44 EST)
• Re: Eight respects in which evolution is neither intelligent *nor* random DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Dec 04 2000 - 19:33:00 EST)
• Re: Eight respects in which evolution is neither intelligent *nor* random DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Dec 04 2000 - 19:09:44 EST)
• Re: Eight respects in which evolution is neither intelligent *nor* random DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Dec 04 2000 - 18:50:18 EST)
• Re: Eight respects in which evolution is neither intelligent *nor* random DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Dec 04 2000 - 18:41:31 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection Chris Cogan (Mon Dec 04 2000 - 16:11:22 EST)
• Re: The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Dec 04 2000 - 14:07:51 EST)
• RE: Chance and Selection Nelson Alonso (Mon Dec 04 2000 - 13:57:49 EST)
• The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything Chris Cogan (Mon Dec 04 2000 - 11:55:17 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection Ralph Krumdieck (Mon Dec 04 2000 - 11:01:40 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection DNAunion@aol.com (Mon Dec 04 2000 - 09:36:11 EST)
• Re: The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything Susan Brassfield Cogan (Mon Dec 04 2000 - 07:21:48 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #1A (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Chris Cogan (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 19:05:15 EST)
• The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything Chris Cogan (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 19:00:20 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) Chris Cogan (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 18:15:34 EST)
• Re: the reptilian egg: a `construction project' design argument Chris Cogan (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 17:50:17 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #1A (was How to prove supernaturalism?) AutismUK@aol.com (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 18:01:25 EST)
• Re: the reptilian egg: a `construction project' design argument Stephen E. Jones (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 16:58:44 EST)
• Re: we have witnessed no new species emerge in the wild? (was Schutzenberger) Stephen E. Jones (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 16:44:47 EST)
• Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who ...) Stephen E. Jones (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 16:12:51 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #1C (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Sat Dec 02 2000 - 18:17:23 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #1B (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Sat Dec 02 2000 - 18:13:49 EST)
• Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #1A (was How to prove supernaturalism?) Stephen E. Jones (Sat Dec 02 2000 - 18:03:07 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection Chris Cogan (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 15:54:13 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection Susan Brassfield Cogan (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 14:45:07 EST)
• Darwin's contribution Chris Cogan (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 13:17:02 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection Chris Cogan (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 11:48:39 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection Chris Cogan (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 10:53:26 EST)
• Re: Well???????????? silk (Sat Dec 02 2000 - 08:31:52 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection Ralph Krumdieck (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 03:19:43 EST)
• Eight respects in which evolution is neither intelligent *nor* random Chris Cogan (Sun Dec 03 2000 - 00:11:25 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection Chris Cogan (Sat Dec 02 2000 - 18:18:29 EST)
• Chance and Selection Bertvan@aol.com (Sat Dec 02 2000 - 16:52:11 EST)
• Re: Chance and Selection Chris Cogan (Fri Dec 01 2000 - 16:49:02 EST)
• Chance and Selection Bertvan@aol.com (Fri Dec 01 2000 - 09:11:05 EST)
• Well???????????? silk (Thu Nov 30 2000 - 10:07:02 EST)

Last message date: Sun Dec 31 2000 - 10:15:12 EST
Archived on: Sun Dec 31 2000 - 10:15:13 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 31 2000 - 10:15:13 EST