Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AndrewC
To which I say, I agree that he is a left-wing nut, but that does not make him wrong on the observation of an irreducible cell.

The "observation" that the cell is irreducible is far from being well-established. When a leftie like Commoner takes a position like that I'm naturally suspicious that he has some hidden agenda. I really don't trust him. That's all I'm saying. When the weight of professional opinion goes the same way, based on verifiable evidence we can all appreciate, I'll be ready to accept such a conclusion. But not on Commoner's say-so. I put him in the same boat with Hillary, notwithstanding his claim to being a biologist. Here's an example of Commoner's "science" opinions:
Barry Commoner: A leading environmentalist reviews his long, contentious past.

96 posted on 03/12/2002 12:10:18 PM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies ]


To: PatrickHenry
I'm sure Commoner knows he's controversial and I sure that's why his magazine article is footnoted.
99 posted on 03/12/2002 12:17:00 PM PST by Phaedrus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson