Inefficient Design Argument

John W. Burgeson (73531.1501@compuserve.com)
08 Jan 96 20:49:00 EST

Robt Van de Water -- your paper treats rabbit feces but not (unless I missed it)
two "design flaws" often cited by Gould & others in arguments that "God would
not
have done it that way." I think the paper will be regarded as woefully
incomplete
if no discussion includes these:

1. The Panda's thumb. See Gould.
2. The "backwards wiring" of the human eye.

Burgy