Re: Limits to variation

Jim Bell (70672.1241@compuserve.com)
03 Aug 95 12:14:58 EDT

David writes, and I fully agree with:

<< Where neoDarwinists advocate no limits
to variability, they must carry the responsibility to defend this
position. Otherwise, neoDarwinism must remain a hypothesis
awaiting testing of its fundamental assumptions. Similarly,
where PCs and YECs propose a model of the animate creation which
involves limited variability, they carry the responsibility to
justify that position. My response to Gordon is to say that we
must start with the data we have - and ask what do we make of it?>>

And then he proceeds to lay out, in summary fashion, what he, I and others
have been saying for some time from our side of the table. Well done. Now we
wait and see what is offered in response. What are the reasons, papers,
citations which lend credibility to the "no limit" side?

To paraphrase TweedleDee: "...but answer came there none." Thus far, at
least.

Jim