|
In a message dated 8/19/2005 5:50:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We have methods for determining good science from bad, or current science from disproven science. Here we agree and disagree. Utter silence from that side of the aisle
when I mentioned the long-discredited ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny
nonsense. Good science doesn't look to the hopeful monster.
Jim Henderson
Senior Counsel
ACLJ
|
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
