<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>AgnosticWeb.com - Sci. Am. article sophomoric</title>
<link>https://agnosticweb.com/</link>
<description>An Agnostic&#039;s Brief Guide to the Universe</description>
<language>en</language>
<item>
<title>Sci. Am. article sophomoric</title>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When I got my issue of the Sci. Am. my blood boiled. The mag. turned into an ultra-liberal, politically-correct junk pile a few years ago. Recently a new editor arrived and the articles made a  noticeable improvement. Until the current article about evolution of the vertibrate eye. Some old stupid comments about the inverted retina, and the blind spot, and how the octopus eye has a so much better design. Pure garbage. Here is an answer, pure science, with reasonable comments:-http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/06/scientific_american_makes_bold047651.html</p>
]]></content:encoded>
<link>https://agnosticweb.com/index.php?id=6582</link>
<guid>https://agnosticweb.com/index.php?id=6582</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2011 14:21:51 +0000</pubDate>
<category>Introduction</category><dc:creator>David Turell</dc:creator>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
