| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"david ford" |
| Date: |
29 Sep 2003 12:24:03 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Quote Mine Project - Part II |
Re: terminological clarification, I argued at length against the theory of
NS in my essay "Problems with the Theory of Natural Selection", which is
linked to in the list of links. If terminology isn't clear there, let me
know. Not all the quotes linked to in the list of links deal with the
theory of NS, though many do. More non-NS-related quotes will be
appearing. Feel free to look at whatever original sources you wish to
look at and make comments on some of the quotes I presented.
Congratulations on the writing up of your thesis. That must have taken a
lot of work.
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003, John Wilkins wrote:
david ford <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote:
The neo-Darwinian theory of natural selection is a load of bunk.
Thanks. Now some terminological clarification, and then we can get on to
how these quotes support this.
What is "neo-Darwinian"? What is the "theory of natural selection"?
This is not rhetorical - I note that many folk use these terms in wildly
different, and often self-contradictory senses. Let's get straight waht
*you* mean by them.
Then, let's go through each of these quotes you list (some of which I
hadn't enountered before, and will be quite useful in their own
context). As you may have noted - I have completed the writing up of my
thesis and may have time to go to the library and check each one. How's
that sound?
If we take it at a leisurely pace, neither of us need get stressed out,
and we can both do the proper reading and research to back up our
points.
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003, John Wilkins wrote:
Michael Gray <fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote:
I have managed to struggle through a few of the links.
They all made sweeping negative judgements based on the
correspondents' various blockages of imagination.
What is the point of this 'Quote Mine', if I may quote you?
I asked him that some time back. He seems to think there is a theme, but
I'm damned if *I* can figure it out. David, can you *please* put the
message into your own words?
--
John Wilkins wilkins.id.au
For long you live and high you fly,
and smiles you'll give and tears you'll cry
and all you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be
.
|
|
| User: "John Wilkins" |
|
| Title: Re: Quote Mine Project - Part II |
29 Sep 2003 07:23:57 PM |
|
|
david ford <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote:
Re: terminological clarification, I argued at length against the theory of
NS in my essay "Problems with the Theory of Natural Selection", which is
linked to in the list of links. If terminology isn't clear there, let me
know. Not all the quotes linked to in the list of links deal with the
theory of NS, though many do. More non-NS-related quotes will be
appearing. Feel free to look at whatever original sources you wish to
look at and make comments on some of the quotes I presented.
Congratulations on the writing up of your thesis. That must have taken a
lot of work.
Thanks, and you bet it did - 7 years' worth.
Anyway, the reason why I want to do this here is that I read your essay,
and cannot fully understand your point or argument. Since Usenet is a
medium for short pithy comments, we can discuss here is small doeses and
perhaps you can convince me, or I you. In any event it will be fun.
Let's proceed like this: you post a claim (back it up with references
and off-list quotes as you see the need. Just make sure you state
clearly), and I'll respond. There will be no need to make it happen
quickly - two weeks to chase up a claim or reference will be just fine.
But surely, if you have done the research necessary to support the claim
that the theory of natural selection is bunk, you will have already done
most of this, and it will be a matter of cut and paste as it is
relevant. It shouldn't be too much problem for you to do this.
Let's do it here, quote by quote, and starting with the terminology,
okay?
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003, John Wilkins wrote:
david ford <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote:
The neo-Darwinian theory of natural selection is a load of bunk.
Thanks. Now some terminological clarification, and then we can get on to
how these quotes support this.
What is "neo-Darwinian"? What is the "theory of natural selection"?
This is not rhetorical - I note that many folk use these terms in wildly
different, and often self-contradictory senses. Let's get straight waht
*you* mean by them.
Then, let's go through each of these quotes you list (some of which I
hadn't enountered before, and will be quite useful in their own
context). As you may have noted - I have completed the writing up of my
thesis and may have time to go to the library and check each one. How's
that sound?
If we take it at a leisurely pace, neither of us need get stressed out,
and we can both do the proper reading and research to back up our
points.
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003, John Wilkins wrote:
Michael Gray <fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote:
I have managed to struggle through a few of the links.
They all made sweeping negative judgements based on the
correspondents' various blockages of imagination.
What is the point of this 'Quote Mine', if I may quote you?
I asked him that some time back. He seems to think there is a theme, but
I'm damned if *I* can figure it out. David, can you *please* put the
message into your own words?
--
John Wilkins wilkins.id.au
For long you live and high you fly,
and smiles you'll give and tears you'll cry
and all you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be
--
John Wilkins wilkins.id.au
For long you live and high you fly,
and smiles you'll give and tears you'll cry
and all you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
