Patrick Caldon
Posts: 68
Joined: April 2006
|
| Quote (GCT @ May 17 2006,13:04) | | Quote (Patrick Caldon @ May 17 2006,12:27) | | However in banning me, Dave Scot decided to edit my post, substantially changing its import, effectively misquoting me. |
Ironic, no?
Do you have the original, unedited post? If so, feel free to post it here so we can all see what DT has done.
And, welcome.
|
Unfortunately no; I made the mistake of believeing their comments policy meant something. To remind you this was done in a thread the point of which was "ID people are very careful and honest their use of quotation". Indeed the phrase "punctillious rectitude" was thrown about a few times.
Anyway, the sense of it is:
| Quote | Dave, you've not followed what I said, so I'll repeat it:
1) Barry stated that "the fossil record does not support the predictons of Darwin"
2) Darwin made many predictions concerning the fossil record. Many. Very gradual change was just one of those predictions.
3) With the exception of very gradual change, to my knowledge all of Darwin's predictions are correct.
4) Barry's statement is therefore untrue, and a misuse of Eldredge's original comment.
On other matters:
- There are marsupials alive in South America today.
- Giving a proper description of "Ring species" is beyond my competence I'm afraid. Ridley gives a great many references in his textbook, so you should get a copy. If you really doubt this you can do the fruit-fly experiments at home.
- jerry, your comment that neo-Darwinism is demolished is complete nonsense. You have to ask the question: "are the rates of change observed in the fossil record consistent with the rates of genetic change observed in modern populations"
- Dave, your quote of Gould's above does not support your arguement.
If I can make a suggestion to you (particularly Dave and jerry); when you make statements like jerry’s above, and use quotations in the manner of Dave above, it becomes apparent that you’re either extraordinarily careless, quite daft, or (most likely) attacking something you don’t really understand --- this is really unfortunate since you are all quite clearly very earnest about this. I'd suggest getting a good text, for instance Mark Ridley's "Evolution", and reading it carefully. It was quite readable for a non-specialist like me.
|
The bold is what Dave preserved; he turns a reasoned argument and constructive suggestion into parting shot of someone flummoxed by superior argument.
|
