name_and_address_supplied{at}hotmail.com (Name And Address Supplied) wrote 

> > > So, the flow of ideas here is largely top->down, i.e. educational
> > > rather than contributing directly to evolutionary research. This is
> > > where my motivation for participation lies - I am an educator as well
> > > as a researcher. When I see flagrant misrepresentation of evolution
> > > theory in messages on this newsgroup, I worry that those who take an
> > > interest in, but are largely ignorant of, evolution theory are going
> > > to be misled. I step in briefly to point out such faults when I see
> > > them.
> > 
> > It would seem then, from how you describe yourself here, that you are
> > relatively unconcerned with finding flagrant misrepresentations of
> > evolution in the standard literature of evolutionary theory?  Am I
> > right?
> 
> No - quite the opposite in fact; where I perceive a work is going to
> be influential, and I see that it contains a serious error, and that
> I'm the appropriate person to respond to that, I do.

I don't get the sense that you even understand the 
issues or that you are capable of the level of rigour 
that is necessary.

Jim
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 11/22/04 9:40:51 PM