Re: [Marxism] (fwd) Darwin and molecular biology

[Ken Ranney <kranney@xxxxxxxxx>]

Einde O'Callaghan has written:
"Perhaps you could sumarise your argument here."  To wit,

I see a serious contradiction between the "small inherited 
modifications" which Darwin imagined, each of which he claimed was 
"profitable to the preserved being" and 18 of 25 steps in the 
synthesis of collagen, none of which is useful in the slightest. Had 
Darwin been aware of the findings of modern molecular biology, which 
of course is impossible, it is hardly likely that he would have 
written the Origin.

He also implies a request for my credentials. They are as follows:

I am a retired pathologist and medical biochemist,  Doctor of 
Medicine, (University of Toronto), Fellow of the Royal College of 
Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, Fellow of the College of American 
Pathologists and Fellow of the Canadian Academy of Clinical Biochemists.

Would you like me to send my essay?


At 07:04 AM 10/10/2008, Les Schaffer wrote:
>[ for Einde ]
>

Ken Ranney
434 Hillcrest Ave
Peterborough, Ontario
K9J 6H6
(705) 743 2939 


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu