[MD] Oops versus God ?

[Platt Holden]

[Ian]
> Your problem Platt is in seeing (actively choosing not to see) any
> distinction between
> 
> Being "part of an explanation".
> And being "the explanation".
> Reductionism at its greediest and most despicable.

Your problem is in not showing

How to divorce a necessary part of an explanation
>From the explanation.
A distinction without a difference at its most sophistic and shameful.
 
> Explicit and fully acknowledged in my mail (and by all the actual
> neo-Darwinian scientist / writers) and ignored by the ignorant
> (naturally). The recommendation was to read the blogs of others, not
> mine. I know you already hang on my every word ;-) why would I need to
> send you there ?

How can I read the blogs of others you recommend on your blog without 
reading your blog? 

Oh well . . .

Platt