Hi all,
First, let me apologise to all the people I "sent" the article to. I
had to send it by placing a request on the Biomednet website (their
copyright rules). I now see that what was sent is not the article
itself, but a new link to the article that didn't require a
subscription. I hope this didn't cause anyone excessive inconvenience or
offence.
Meanwhile, I have made contact with the author, and will report if
anything interesting comes of it.
HORSE
<<<Well, I went and got my own copy and on first reading it looks very
much like another creationist argument in different clothing. It doesn't
appear to be the standard "...if we can only rubbish science and
Darwinism sufficiently then the only other choice is God and
Creation..." garbage but there is still a very strong element of the
teleological argument involved which I just don't buy.>>>
Interesting interpretation Horse. My own understanding was quite
different. From what I can tell, he claims that religious anti-Darwinism
is based on falseness and superficiality. I understand the article to be
very definitely pro-Darwinist.
A good week to all,
Jonathan Marder
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:43 BST