[Taxacom] molecular nonsense?

[Jim Croft]

van Leeuwenhoek's 'scope?  Sheer luxury!   When I were 'lad we were
just taught to squint harder...

jim

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Bob Mesibov <mesibov at southcom.com.au> wrote:
> Hi, John.
>
> I think the best way to understand 'this molecular stuff' is with
> analogies.
>
> The kindest analogy is with the first microscopes. The optics were crap
> and people didn't have a clue what they were looking at. Reports
> appeared of dust mistaken for 'animalcules', and of tiny, complete
> animals packed into eggs (preformation). Over time, optics improved. The
> reports got better and you could begin to trust the results.
>
> I'm old enough to remember (this is analogy 2) the early transmission
> SEM work and how people responded to it. One anatomist told this student
> "I believed it until I saw the actual SEMs."
-- 
_________________
Jim Croft ~ jim.croft at gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499

"Words, as is well known, are the great foes of reality."
- Joseph Conrad, author (1857-1924)