Re: Why Andrew MacRae's opinion LACKS CREDIBILITY
Bob Casanova (email@example.com)
Mon, 13 Jan 1997 22:05:27 GMT
On Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:51:03 GMT, in sci.anthropology.paleo,
firstname.lastname@example.org (Ed Conrad) wrote:
>There is NOTHING more important in scence than to try to answer, as
>honestly as we possibly can, the time-honored question of who we
>really are and how we really got here.
>Unfortunately, the existing theory of man's inhuman origin simply does
>not hold up because of the TOTAL absence of scientific evidence.
>The only thing the ``theory" of evolution" has going for it in the
>case of man's origin is rhetoric, and all the rhetoric in the world is
>powerless to transform theory -- Webster's: ``an idea, an opinion, a
>guess..." -- into solid and undisputed fact.
Still don't know the scientific usage of "theory", huh Ed? No
surprise. And *I'm* certainly not going to go through it AGAIN.
>Therefore, it remains nothing more than a theory without
>any basis in solid fact.
Wrong again. As usual.
(Note followups, if any)
"No one's life, liberty or property is safe while
the legislature is in session." - Mark Twain