Hi Russell,

After reading this and your other posts, I think I may agree with your more
than I initially thought I did. ;) Yes, Evolution does cover a lot of
ground, and parts of it are still being debated (though it is mostly the
finer details). What I first took exception to was calling evolution a
religion.

I don't know about where you live (NZ?), but at the moment here in the US
there are very vocal groups attacking science and especially science
education. These groups are trying to get religious beliefs (under the guise
of "intelligent design") taught in science classes. It is very much an
attack, and so far hasn't been too successful thankfully. They have at least
not been successful in the cases that have been brought to court. Public
opinion is another matter though...

While I appreciate Popper's contribution to the philosophy of science, I
find your strict interpretation of it to not be very useful. :) I think that
a subject can be given a weight regarding where it falls between science and
non-science. Check out "The Borderlands of Science" by Michael Shermer. He
discusses this boundry detection problem in the first chapter or so.

Take care, Matthew.

-- 
"Keep your stickers out of my science book; I don't paste crap in your
bible."
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist