> Emlyn wrote:
> > Being a creationist is pretty dumb, true. However, "directed evolution"
> > least sounds plausible, and merrits some attention. Further, the idea
> > it's not all evolution, that something else important might be going on
> > which we can't see yet, that merrits attention too.
> Directed evolution does not merit attention unless there is good
> evidence for it. The merely plausible or possible doesn't merit
> attention all by itself.
> This something we can't see yet is another way of saying we have no
> evidence for any such or reason to pay attention to it before there is
> any such reason.
> > I think it's a worthwhile thread. We assume natural selection most of
> > time; it's good to try defending it/breaking it down every now and
> But there are quite good lists and resources dedicated to these
> questions already. Why is it good or worthwhile to discuss it in any
> reasonable detail (and it does get detailed really rapidly if it is
> worth the bandwidth) here on this list?
> Just asking.
> - samantha
If only because it gives those of us who couldn't care less about certain
irritating topics, which have flared up again, something to read.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:20 MDT