> >***** Why should anyone take his word? In EATIC, [Denton] used 14 year-old
> >cytochrome-c data to prop up his 'typology' approach, despite the fact that
> >as recently as 4-5 years before it EATIC was published, there was a major
> >re-evaluation of that data with additional data using more stringent
> >of analysis that demonstrated that the 'evolutionist view' of phylogeny was
> >correct. I consider that a major error of omission, one that should not be
> >taken lightly, especially when he was attempting to bolster his
> anti-evolutionary claims 'scientifically..
> I am not qualified to judge whether Denton used out-of-date data in
>Evolution a Theory in Crises. If he did, it would hardly invalidate
>he said thereafter.
If he based his argument on discredited data, that discredits his argument.
Life is short, but it is also very wide.