You must must mean John Sanford and not Jon Sanlin. Have you even read anything by John Sanford? If you had, you probably would not confused/misspell both his first and last name. Putting his writings underneath your pillow every night and thanking God for creating osmosis is not the same.
Thanks for the correction. I have had trouble spelling at least since the fourth grade.
I read his book and was fasinated by it. I especially liked the part about him saying the accumulation of mutations in humans matches the exponintial decare rate of humans' life spans from about 900 down to about 100 year life expectancy.
The idea that he is no longer respected is just like when I used to come up with ideas in rotory cutter head building. At the time the owner of a nationally known company told me that it was not posible. And then low and behold a few month later he comes out with a news release in the industry with my idea. being right is not always popular at the time.
I question why John didn't publish his work in a peer reviewed setting? Could it be that he cherry picked and misrepresented data? or Ingnored overwheleming data that contradicted his arguement?
Unlike Behe, who can be argued just didn't understand the error he made in his calculation, John Stanford's book can only be considered as purposeful piece of disinformation
The collection of taxes which are not absolutely required, which do not beyond reasonable doubt contribute to public welfare, is only a species of legalized larceny. Under this Republic the rewards of industry belong to those who earn them. Coolidge
