<< At 11:07 AM 4/17/99 EDT, you wrote:
>I wonder if Jon Wells has ever heard of the phrase 'experiment'?
Jon has a Ph.D. in Molecular Biology from Berkeley, and many years of
research experience and publications.
****** Jon also has a Ph.D. in theology of some sort, indeed his first one.
As for his 'many years' of research experience and publications, WHERE ARE
THEY? They certainly are not in the peer reviewed literature. The tripe he
puts out in anti-evoution publications can hardly be classified as research
oriented. The articles he writes available online are little more than
evolution bashing BS. For someone with so many 'years of research' under his
belt, one has to wonder why he would characterize pharyngeal pouches in
embryoes as 'tiny ridges' as he does in one of his essays.
What credentials do you have that
would allow you to criticize his understanding of the meaning of
****** I am a Ph.D. candidate in an anatomy department. What credentials do
you have to defend his ideas? That the moths could not effectively be
observed in their natural state has been pointed out. SO? If one cannot do
something in situ, one creates the necesary provisions to test an hypothesis.
Wells supposedly does embryological research. Is observing an embryo in a
petri dish fraudulent? Well, they certainly don't naturally develop there,
do they? I do not doubt that Wells knows what an experiment is; I question
his motives in deriding the experimental designs of others.
And what leads you to conclude that he has any difficulty at
all understanding the meaning of the term "experiment"?
***** What leads you to be unable to recognize a rhetorical question when you