A Guide to the tactics of Evolutionists

I have finally discovered what is both the cause of my less than A+ work in genetics at Cornell and the persistant distaste for some attempts to fuse religion in science in the name of change(evolutionary theory).It has to do with 'isolating' traits
(in Carter's sense)

quote:

---

---

NOT geneticized because they are only statistically possible in the current evo theory and thus are being "thrown" out of the discussion being "bad" for the work. But in my case it was ME, via my bad genes (ones that might or might not work) that got "thrown out".

quote:

---

---

I get myself out of the faulty reference to "Calvanism" by a reflection on Pascal. Most of it is uploaded under a PowerPoint called ONPASCAL
The Trainer's product PAGEThe interesting reference to Baetson during WW1 shows how there is tension between the "selling" of the core Darwinian logic vs. the DOUBLE(Mendelizing fraction TO penetrance) statistical remove of those parts of organisms (genetically) that are subject to biogeography today. This also explains why Croizat's approach was not well redressed.Thanks to EvC, I have been able to retain a suffiently broad enough perspective to recover what was missing in the same environment (war vs no war), that my Mother say, would accept as a compatible relation between science and religion. THIS IS NOT where the point that Hardin makes belongs. ID "invaded" this area but some of the "tools" to make this point cleaer were not available until the end of the 80s by which time I was aready "out". Genetics may have been thinkable as Calvanistic in the first Wwar but it is not in today's globalizing culture, in my opinion. My mom will always disagree. Such is my generation. That much I posses.