Apart from Quetzal and Mammuthus, who here actually believes that the studies of ecology and extinction are well developed? Who here believes Quetzal and Mammuthus on their word, without them referencing *any* appraisal what-so-ever that supports their postion? Or who here has read all the papers and books referenced by Quetzal and Mammuthus and came to any conclusion based on those references?
Man, are you inconsistent or what? This is PRECISELY what I suggested back in
post 190 on this thread. You responded that leaving it up to the peanut gallery was unacceptable. Now you ask the same question I did over 40 posts ago? Gaaakh, it's impossible to discuss anything with you, you know that? Read the books and papers and then get back to me.
On another note, I notice your friend Nando from Nganjuk has the same style and inability to write coherent sentences as you do - you guys really have it in for Dawkins, don't you? (See this
amazon.com review of Dawkin's "Extended Phenotype". Or
this one on "Blind Watchmaker"). Is this a major coffee-house topic of conversation in Nganjuk? I mean, you both wrote almost identical reviews of Watchmaker, f'rinstance.