potshots

[John Grehan]

>OK, John, you've been pretty good at taking potshots at half-baked
>explanations of natural selection and evolution (usually failing to
>distinguish between the two).  From what I can see, most of your criticisms
>are based on assertions that "there are other views."  Of course there are
>other views.

My comments are mostly directed (perhaps with a lack of desired clarity) to the
fact that in the US evolution teaching doesn't seem to be working, but the
remidy seems to be more of the same which emphasises the doctrinal
truth of evolution over evolution as research methodology. If it doesn't
work already I doubt more of the same will either.

The doctrine I have seen so far states or implies that there is only one
way to see evolution (e.g. natural selection).

>What I'd like is a succinct summary of YOUR explanation for how evolution
>occurs and how that explanation differs from the widely accepted version.

I don't see the point here. So I have an alternative view of evolution. But
so what?
My view is a minority view, and so is by definition invalid against the
majority view.
If anyone wants to take potshots at it that's ok by me. The view is summarized
quite will in the panbiogeography book  I've mentioned on this list before. If
not already familiar to you it is: Panbiogeography: tracking the history of
life. (1999)
R. C. Craw, J. R. Grehan, M. J. Heads. Oxford University Press.

Even if one were to disagree with it, the book does present an integrated
evolutionary
framework dealing with biogeography, geology, ecology, and organic evoltuion.

John Grehan