On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 04:54:08 +0000 (UTC), 
Jim Menegay  wrote:
> lamoran{at}bioinfo.med.utoronto.ca (Larry Moran) wrote in 
> message news:...
>> On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 02:21:25 +0000 (UTC), 
>> Jim Menegay  wrote:
>> 
>> [snip]
>> 
>> > The hypothesis of drift cannot be verified.  Full stop.
>> 
>> The hypothesis of random genetic drift and the hypothesis of natural 
>> selection make definite predictions about the outcome of allele 
>> frequencies over time. Both can be tested experimentally in the 
>> laboratory and in natural populations. Both hypotheses have been 
>> verified. Full stop.
> 
> John's argument, as I understand it, is that an unknown deterministic
> process could conceivably make the same predictions as the hypothesis
> of drift.  He may well be right about this.  Therefore, it seems
> tactically correct to me to concede his point, but then to point out 
> the philosophical and epistemological silliness of his argument.
> 
> The evidence that you cite fully convinces me that drift is taking
> place, but, by its very nature, it can never convince John.

I agree. According to Edser's silly philosophy nothing in science 
can ever be verified - including natural selection.



Larry Moran
---
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 4/7/04 3:31:24 PM