On Fri, 19 Apr 96 09:16:15 MDT you wrote to Chuck Warman:
[...]
CW>1. The characterization of intelligent, well-informed critics such
>as Phil Johnson as "bomb-throwers," and dismissing their >criticisms
as irrelevant
JF>This gets down to the crux of the problem. I read "Darwin on
>Trial", and I did not consider him to be "well-informed".
Yet is is *Johnson* whose book Gould reviews; it is *Johnson*
who Weinberg described as "the most respectable academic critic of
evolution", it is *Johnson* who Provine befriends and invites to
address his class; it is *Johnson* who Eldredge debates - *not* Terry
Gray, or Howard Van Til, or Denis Lamoureux, or any TE
Perhaps you should re-read the book? You may have missed the main
point? :-)
Regards.
Steve
----------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Jones ,--_|\ sjones@iinet.net.au |
| 3 Hawker Ave / Oz \ http://www.iinet.net.au/~sjones/ |
| Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ phone +61 9 448 7439. (These are |
| Perth, Australia v my opinions, not my employer's) |
----------------------------------------------------------------