Re: ignorami

--- In metatuning@y..., "X. J. Scott" <xjscott@e...> wrote:
> course I guess Drs Erlich and Chalmers
> are just way smarter than the big dummies
> who signed that statement

Realize though that a list of those scientists, with as good or better
credentials, who disagreed with a basic statement denying
evolution by natural selection, would be a hundred times as long.

John Starrett

BTW, the simplistic description of evolution by natural selection
offered in many older textbooks is not representative of the
understanding and views of the majority of scientists working at the
frontiers of evolutionary biology. Scientific theories are always more
complicated, surprising and beautiful than the versions presented in
the popular media.

> Realize though that a list of those scientists, with as good
> or better credentials, who disagreed with a basic statement
> denying evolution by natural selection, would be a hundred
> times as long.

> John Starrett

Hi John!

Thanks for joining!

Please submit your list of which categories of
self-deception or ignorance each scientist is suffering
from.

Cheers!

> BTW, the simplistic description of evolution by natural
> selection offered in many older textbooks is not
> representative of the understanding and views of the majority
> of scientists working at the frontiers of evolutionary
> biology. Scientific theories are always more complicated,
> surprising and beautiful than the versions presented in the
> popular media.

Ah! Well that explains it!!! All those scientists
have simply been reading too many tabloids!

- Jeff