Re: Chauvin on "childhood hypotheses of biology"

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, howard hershey wrote:
> david ford wrote:
> > On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, r norman wrote:
> > david ford:
> >
> >>>Chauvin, Remy.  1970.  "Finalism in Biology" in _Evolution in
> >>>Perspective: Commentaries in Honor of Pierre Lecomte Du
> >>>Nouy_, George N. Shuster & Ralph E. Thorson, editors
> >>>(Wisconsin: University of Notre Dame Press), 282pp., 59-70.
> >>>From the biographical notes on vii:
> >>>    REMY CHAUVIN was educated at Laval University and
> >>>    the University of Paris, and holds the degree of Doctor of
> >>>    Natural Sciences.  Some of his numerous and distinguished
> >>>    publications treat of insect life.  During recent years he has
> >>>    been a member of the faculty of the University of
> >>>    Strasbourg.
>
> [snip]
>
> >> This wouldn't be the same Dr. Remy Chauvin who is widely cited by
> >> every health food store pushing us to eat bee pollen, would it?
> >> Or the one quoted by Deleuze in "A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and
> >> Schizophrenia
> >
> > I don't know x 2.  Do you know?
>
> You mean, rather, that you don't care.  It matters not to you whether
> the quotes you use come from a complete nut job with all sorts of crazy
> ideas.

Which individual(s), if any, that I have quoted do you consider [hh]"a
complete nut job with all sorts of crazy ideas"?

>  Just like it doesn't matter whether the quotes are ancient or
> out-of-context.

Which quotes, if any, that I have presented do you consider
[hh]"out-of-context"?
I will grant that some of the [hh]"quotes are ancient"-- my oldest quote
is probably from way back in 1859.  Much has been learned of the
biological world since 1859, not all of it supporting 1800s speculations
about matters biological.

how has the theory of NS survived?:
Grasse, C. P. Martin, Berlinski, D. M. S. Watson
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=Pine.SGI.3.96.980608234718.51C-100000%40umbc8.umbc.edu

>   All that matters to you is that the quote seems to
> criticize evolution

My primary focus is the theory of natural selection.

>   and seems to come from someone with "credentials"
> that appear to give the criticism some "credibility".
>
> [snip]

In your view, does Chauvin have credentials pertinent to a discussion of
biological origins?
What in Chauvin's remarks do you disagree with?