http://www.amazon.com/...duct/0609601415/103-3162875-7897446
I could not believe that Gould tried to slip in a reference to the Morris's and the Gish's of the worlds when comparing Owen and Huxley. It is sad because with the issue of posteriorizing a horn (space) I now do understand better that Johnson is correct about how wrong the current evolutionary elite is. I was very suprised to UNDERSTAND that no matter what DNA similarity is accounted between man and the apes the conditions of the hippocampus is the pelvis of the debate v a via delving into the issue as deeply as the elite already are....
With respect to the term homology there discussed Gould might have been "covertly" refering to Croizat's rhetorical use of 50 vs 49 or 51 percent vs the whole series underdebate but since he brings in creationism I find that biology has even lost me to the issue that seems so much clearer within the primates.
The argument to similarity based on DNA IS A RUSE and this is not a"good" word.
There is now little wonder in my mind why Gould would have thought about the terrible notion of interbreeding humans and primates. I had and will now never even think this. It was a wrong idea even from the biology of it all.
We are different enough that this question should not even be asked at all.
see also
Powell’s Books | The World’s Largest Independent Bookstore
http://www.nobeliefs.com/Gould1.htm
This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 02-17-2006 02:59 PM
™ Version 4.2