[MD] are theism and mysticism mutually exclusive notions?

[Heather Perella]

     [Case]
> yeah dawkins proclaiming his blind watchermaker,
> sheesh. he is so icky. and
> untenable to the moq, too. looks like somebody's
> watchmaker needs new
> glasses. if we could just get dawkins to the moq
> optical department we could
> make him a spectacle, to make him less skeptical. 

     Case, you know dawkins isn't very credible to
those in the PE (Punctuated Equilibrium) group of
scientists.  Gould has given very convincing arguments
against dawkins selfish genes approach.  Yet, as we
all know static patterns take some time to develop and
latch, theories are debated, but Gould shows how the
larger complexities of the organism puts the organism
on a level that constrains the 'lower' level of DNA. 
Yes, and Gould talks about levels, which each 'lower'
level (yes he gives a lengthy talk about 'higher' and
'lower')  constraining 'higher' levels, thus, the
lower levels apply a conservative approach to the
'higher' level, whereas the 'higher' levels tend to
push the boundaries of the 'lower' levels where
although the lower levels must be conservative, they
must be flexible enough to change when change is
necessary.

SA

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com