In a message dated 10/1/2000 3:16:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
bharper@postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu writes:
> >Ignoring for the moment the accusations, Behe seems to suggest that if some
> >examples can be shown incorrect why should one believe any of the other
> >examples.
>
> Yes, it is a classical argument _ad hominem_.
>
>
That's how I interpreted it. I guess using this 'logic' we can now reject
Johnson's arguments as well for instance?
I don't think so....
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 01 2000 - 18:59:38 EDT