Re: Date limit set on first Americans

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 11:10:22 +0100, Peter Ashby
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Eric Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> 
>> None of that has got anything to do with the point I made. For
>> Darwin's work, either at the time it was published or in the preceding
>> 25 years, THERE WERE NO PEER REVIEWERS. Had it been submitted for peer
>> review it was more likely to have been rejected than published.
>> >
>there was the small matter of the Royal Societies Eric of which Darwin 
>was  member. it was expected that to be accepted and taken seriously you 
>had to present work at the meetings. 

Did Darwin publish or present on his theory of evolution?

>The proceedings from those meetings 
>are still held in University Libraries if you want to reference them. I 
>have a paper submitted at the moment with two citations to papers in the 
>Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London from the 1890's for eg.




Eric Stevens