Why is it so I important to get the evolution thing right, and, perhaps, not
to "imply" that it happens? Perhaps because the heathens are at the gates.
I found a rare lead on Slashdot to something that appeared on PLoS Biology.
It seems that some scientists are reluctant to use the "E" word in their
papers. Being implicit is, they suggest, a bit of a cop out.
I won't bore y'all with the details here. Try this, which tracks back to the
sources I plundered:
http://michaelkenward.blogspot.com/2007/03/do-biomedical-researchers-believe
-in.html
or
http://tinyurl.com/2tklgg
Be scared, be very very scared.
__________________________________________________________________
Michael Kenward / Phone/Fax: +44 (0)1444 401064
/
Science Writer & Stuff / Genetically modified words for sale
-----Original Message-----
From: psci-com: on public engagement with science
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sarah Dellar
Sent: 04 March 2007 12:53
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PSCI-COM] Save At-Bristol's WildWalk!
If Mr Gibson had ever actually taken the time to investigate what Wildwalk
has to offer he would have understood that the subject of Darwinian
evolution and natural selection is implied in most of the interpretation
---End Quoted (and cut) Message---
**********************************************************************
1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
send an email to [log in to unmask] with the following message:
set psci-com nomail
2. To resume email from the list, send the following message:
set psci-com mail
3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message:
leave psci-com
4. Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including list archive,
can be found at the list web site: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
5. The psci-com gateway to internet resources on science communication and science
and society can be found at http://psci-com.ac.uk
**********************************************************************
|