[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Theory or Law : Semantics??

To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Re: Theory or Law : Semantics??
From: "Richard W. Travsky" <rtravsky@uwyo.edu>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:46:15 -0700
Authentication-results: msg-ironport1.usc.edu; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
In-reply-to: <965013.1324.qm@web27504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
References: <965013.1324.qm@web27504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Reply-to: rtravsky@uwyo.edu
Sender: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu


On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, evelyn sobielski wrote:

[...]
Well the ToE is a well-estabished theory, no doubt about that. But it'snot a "law". The law would perhaps be "d organism/d t evolves".


But it would still be accurate to at least say "lawS of evolution"...

[...]

References:
- Re: Theory or Law : Semantics??
  - From: evelyn sobielski <koreke77@yahoo.de>

Prev by Date: Re: The Permo-Triassic extinction killed the dinosaurs, according to Fox News
Next by Date: Re: Google books
Previous by thread: Re: Theory or Law : Semantics??
Next by thread: RE: Theory or Law : Semantics??
Indexes: