Hi, Iblis.
Iblis writes:
If anyone else had proposed that topic, some smart mod would have stepped up and forced the poster to sharpen it up. "Please explain better what you mean by Neo-Darwinism" would have been one of the first dictates that would come to mind.
In all honesty, I think this is an example of over-scrutinizing the creationist.
I don't think Slevesque's use of the term "Neo-Darwinism" is particularly controversial, and certainly shouldn't have caused as much confusion as it apparently did. Either the term refers to the first formulation of ToE that completely rejected all possibility of Lamarckian-style inheritance, or to a more developed version of the same thing that described all the same mechanics in terms of molecular biology and Mendelian genetics. It really isn't that big a deal.
The rest of the OP, however, was rather confusing, and I couldn't figure out what Slevesque was saying until several posts into the thread. Slevesque apparently assumed that we all knew what he was talking about before we had even read the OP, and that turned out to be an incorrect assumption.
I agree that the additional oversight of a different moderator would have been better.
-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.
™ Version 4.2
