Re: Is evolution really the central theory for all of biology?

From: Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Sat Sep 17 2005 - 03:02:20 EDT

In what way am I mischaracterizing, for instance, Kant, Liebniz, Burnet, Tindal, Ray, Grew, Powell, Chambers, Brougham, Conybeare, etc., etc.?

--Cornelius

I haven't got time to write a book on this list. I find all that you say very weird and not in line with all I have read from all these people concerned

Michael
Received on Sat Sep 17 03:06:07 2005

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: steven@bowness.demon.co.uk: "Post-Darwinist: Discussion of evil in a science journal"
Previous message: Terry M. Gray: "Re: Is evolution really the central theory for all of biology?"
In reply to: Cornelius Hunter: "Re: Is evolution really the central theory for all of biology?"
Next in thread: George Murphy: "Re: Is evolution really the central theory for all of biology?"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ By Date ] [ By Thread ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ] [ By messages with attachments ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Sep 17 2005 - 03:06:08 EDT