Greg wrote:

John W. Burgeson (johnburgeson@juno.com)
Tue, 16 Dec 1997 10:46:18 -0700

Greg wrote: " Lloyd is portraying Dawkins as believing that
mutation and natural selection are the sole processes responsible for
evolutionary change. I (and Wesley) are disputing that. "

Aha! Maybe a light dawns!

Is it true, then, that you claim that some evolution would continue to
happen in the absence of mutation and natural selection?

What would it look like? How would we measure it? Would such changes
qualify as anything of particular interest?

Note: the above is NOT in irony or sarcasm. As one who has used e-mail
concepts since the early 80s and is a SYSOP on Compuserve these past
three years, I am absolutely convinced that sarcasm/irony is perhaps the
least effect way to communicate on a LISTSERV. When Wesley "giggled," it
seems to me, it set things off and blurred the issues rather than
clarifying them.

Burgy