RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
franky172



Posts: 158
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2007,11:40   

Denyse suggests that http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....rprised scientists doubt the common descent hypothesis.  In support of this claim she cites two quotes from two different papers by Gordon and Doolittle.

I can't access the one paper from Dr. Gordon she cites, but the other paper by Dr. Doolittle has been discussed http://www.uncommondescent.com/educati....t-92415 here.  In short, according to my reading, the paper does not suggest that common ancestry is false - it proposes that the concept of "ancestry" must be broadened to include activities like HGT which may break the "tree" aspects of the tree of life; this is not, I think, what Denyse is implying the paper says.

But what difference does that make when you want to include YECs in your big tent?

  
  29999 replies since Jan. 16 2006,11:43 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]