Allen Aigen wrote:

> Malacologists continue to do good work--don't fire them all!  Rather than 'accepted evolution'
> try 'what was the most commonly accepted, hypothetical scheme of molluscan evolution'.
> That is the sort of explanation which gets into textbooks, but of course is still subject to
> revision as more information is gathered, or new tests of the hypothesis are made.

I'll accept, "the current hypothetical scheme of molluscan evolution".
That way I won't be as upset when the revisions are published.

We old non-scientists get so cranky when ya add in quarks and muons,
tell us there's four - not three - forms of matter, take away our ninth
planet . . .

You have to prepare us for this stuff.

m

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[log in to unmask] - a forum for informal discussions on molluscs
To leave this list, click on the following web link:
http://listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=conch-l&A=1
Type your email address and name in the appropriate box and
click leave the list.
----------------------------------------------------------------------