...or get off the pot... Re: Becoming altricial/bi

J. Moore (j#d#.moore@canrem.com)
Sun, 15 Oct 95 10:26:00 -0500

Pa> I've set out a list of criteria for creation of a new hominid species in
Pa> the "tree-climbing hominid" thread - as a challenge to Alex Duncan. I
Pa> do not believe that he's going to be able to meet it. But I want to
Pa> give him a bit of time. It's important to get the criteria right first
Pa> and he may want to question or modify or add to them. Please put your
Pa> ideas in too.

Pa> As soon as we see that the Savanna/Mosaic scenario cannot provide a
Pa> remotely reasonable hypothesis, I'll set out a "new improved" AAT which,
Pa> I believe, will satisfy every one of the (revised?) criteria.
Pa> Paul.

So this means you actually don't intend to produce the referenced,
accurate AAT you said you would? By reading some of the last
20-30 years of literature, you can see that there exist "remotely
reasonable" hypotheses; so post your AAT. Please be sure to
incorporate the suggestions you asked for and received.

On the other hand, it may be you just want to do what Morgan does:
tear down a strawman and offer nothing but a vague, shifting
suggestion in its place. If that's the case, you might as well it
to Morgan; she does it so well (and often). If you have
something, post it.

Jim Moore (j#d#.moore@canrem.com)

p.s. Interesting the parallels between the techniques used by
AATers and those of creationists:

1986 *Science and Creation: Geological, Theological and
Educational Perspectives*, edited by Robert W. Hanson.
Issues in Science and Technology Series, American Association for
the Advancement of Science, Macmillan Publishing Company: New
York, Collier Macmillan Publishers: London.

Chapter 7: "A Two-Model Creation versus Evolution Course",
by William M. Thwaites

pg. 95:
"They preferred to intimate that there is something fundamentally
wrong with evolutionary theory and that creationism is the logical

Chapter 10: "Skepticism: Another Alternative to Science or
Belief", by Stephen G. Brush

pg. 161:
"...creationists assume that there are only two alternatives,
creation and evolution, so destroying the credibility of evolution
would necessarily enhance that of creationism. Such a strategy
might seem illogical to anyone familiar with the recent
development of scientific theories and with the wide variety of
creationist and evolutionist theories that have been or might be
proposed. It is not possible to establish one theory merely by
criticizing another one."

* Q-Blue 2.0 *