His thinking is out of date.
> The second part: "slow, gradual evolution". Would "fast" or "not gradual"
> be better?
Dawkins says "The only way to explain blah blah blah is by the process of slow
gradual evolution." Later in the book he describes evolution as occuring
"instantaniously". Which statement is right?
> >I didn't call Dawkins an "idiot" just to be a smart-ass.
>
> Here is a challenge for you, David: rephrase this sentence from the cover
> flap of "Climbing Mount Improbable" the way you think a *non-idiot* author
> would write it.
I don't know if I'm a non-idiot, but I'd be happy with changing
"The only way to explain seemingly designed objects is by slow, gradual
evolution blah blah blah"
to
"The only way to explain seemingly designed objects is by the processes of
evolution blah blah blah"
or keep the statement as is, and later on don't refer to evolution as
occuring "instantaniously".
The first option is better, since evolution of a new species can occur
within the lifetime of one human being.
-- David Leeper dleeper@gte.net Homo Deus http://home1.gte.net/dleeper/index.htm 1 + 1 != 2 http://home1.gte.net/dleeper/CMath.html