From: Walter Hicks (wallyshoes@mindspring.com)
Date: Sun Oct 12 2003 - 15:45:41 EDT
Sarah Berel-Harrop wrote:
> Walt, have you considered picking up an evolutionary
> biology textbook as a reference?
>
My bookshelf is too full for anything other than
what I really need. For evolutionary biology the
web site:
http://www.Colorado.EDU/epob/epob3250mgrant/public_html/lectlist.html
was recommended to me for a cursory understanding.
Do you think this is O.K.?
> You seem to be
> using _Origin of Species_ as your reference point,
> and that is quite inappropriate.
>
Wrong on two counts.
1.) I use Darwin's work only as a reference for
what Darwin really said -- versus what I read as
someone else's opinion of what he said. (e.g. that
he spoke of mutation.)
2.) That _is_ the appropriate way to evaluate what
Darwin said. (IMO)
> I have Futuyama's
> and Ridley's textbooks available at my local library,
> and Ridley's very good anthology _Evolution_ as well.
> I suspect any of these references would help you
> immensely.
>
> Terry, didn't we ask the Bio PhD's to send in definitions
> of evolution as part of the poll? Are you able to post
> final results and the definitions?
>
I would love to see those!
Walt
-- =================================== Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>In any consistent theory, there must exist true but not provable statements. (Godel's Theorem)
You can only find the truth with logic If you have already found the truth without it. (G.K. Chesterton) ===================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Oct 12 2003 - 15:45:39 EDT