In a message dated 12/21/2002 11:03:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, [log in to unmask] writes:
The mis-info that The ToE is a complete theory, but in err. No
theories are complete. All are subject to scrutiny and all are
modified as we learn more.
The ToE does not end with Darwin or natural selection. Everyone who
studies it, even at a basic level, knows this. So why are you
pointing it out like it's some
No one is "clutching at straws in the face of the Design onslaught".
This is a laughable notion. I can't even believe anyone would suggest
And where did this come from?
"...the general frustration that doesn't, can't, take Dawkins and
the population genetics of random variation seriously anymore."
You're spreading the mis-info, not the "Darwinists"
You can't have it both ways, and I merely pointed to the fact that Darwinists are in retreat here. I have no quarrel with the successes of a partial view of Darwinism. But what are these successes? Random variation and natural selection simply don't constitute a full explanation, and there has been no explanation of the origin of species. So I think that as far a misinfo goes that's a humdinger.
As to Mayr, read John Greene's Debating Darwin, with its extensive account of his debate with Mayr by correspondence.
Greene's views are not ultimate either, but he won that debate, as far as I can see. And the flippant tone of my email was merely frustration that a man like Greene and other Darwin critics got deep sixed with people in the Darwin estab slowly morph their position with tidbits from the critics all the while maintaining control of the basic paradigm situation. They have a problem, people are still buying tons of Dawkins books, and any critic of Dawkins gets a zillion pit bull attacks from the howler monkey gang, but Dawkins doesn't hack anymore. It is also a question of the book market. A critic has to leverage the market, and mask the changing position, etc etc
It gets nauseatingly worse and worse.
World History and the Eonic Effect