dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) (11/10/84)
> [Ethan Vishniac] > > The comment about "missing links" is one that I'm continually > confused by. What is a "missing link"? Presumably something that > shares some of the characteristics of the forms it is "transitional" > between. By that definition an overwhelming number of "missing links" > have been found. A missing link is a fossil form that is intermediate between its predecessors and its descendents. I'll leave it to you to reply with the names of the organisms that qualify. > It is as though one were to assert that the > interval between 0 and 1 was not continuously filled with numbers, but > that there were "missing links" between the two. Whenever this > proposition is confronted with intermediate numbers ( e.g. 0.5, 0.75) > the argument is modified to include the discovered numbers as > delimiters of the missing intervals and the claim is repeated that > there has been no progress towards uncovering the "missing links". I will remember this when you reply, and will try not to use this argument. -- Paul DuBois {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois