Re: [asa] historical versus experimental sciences

From: Murray Hogg <>
Date: Fri Aug 21 2009 - 08:49:35 EDT

Cameron Wybrow wrote:
> In other words, when the data seem to undermine the leading theory of
> origins, its practitioners are allowed to postulate unknown,
> undemonstrated mechanisms which operate in unspecifiable ways, in order
> to save their theory, and are allowed to call such speculation "scientific".

Actually, it's the very essence of "scientific" that when data X seem to bring theory Y into question, you are allowed to postulate a reformulation of Y to take account of X.

So I'm not sure where the problem lies.

Isn't Hebert ALLOWED to postulate a mechanism by which a well grounded theory (neo-Darwinism) assimilates new data (mitochondrial DNA evidence)?


To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Aug 21 08:50:34 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Aug 21 2009 - 08:50:34 EDT