> I''d be interested in hearing comments about the
> following web site:
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/0997issue/0997infocus.html
>
> It seems to me somewhere in this research lies an area of compromise.
> Creationists could find room for claiming it was part of of God's design.
> Agnostics could settle for Nature's design. ...
No doubt different people will focus on different aspects of this
research. The people who are most under pressure are the
Neodarwinists - the research findings do not fit neatly into their
theory. I did contribute a few comments on this when Barry Hall's
work was published:
http://www.pages.org/bcs/Bcs017.html
"Surprise results with mutant bacteria".
This provides at least one perspective for you!
I heard on the radio recently an Australian researcher named Steele
who has now published a book to develop these non-Darwinian ideas (to
which he has contributed original research). Unfortunately, I have
not been able to find out the details. However, this is going to be
an increasingly live issue!
Best regards,
David J. Tyler.