Reply to Butterfield on stem‐group “worms”: fossil lophotrochozoans in the Burgess Shale

Bioessays 29 (2):200-202 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,923

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

From weird wonders to stem lineages: The second reclassification of the Burgess shale fauna.Keynyn Brysse - 2008 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 39 (3):298-313.
A Web of Controversies: Complexity in the Burgess Shale Debate. [REVIEW]Christian Baron - 2011 - Journal of the History of Biology 44 (4):745 - 780.
Does the Burgess shale have moral implications?Stephen R. L. Clark - 1993 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 36 (4):357 – 380.
Epistemic values in the Burgess Shale debate.Christian Baron - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 40 (4):286-295.
Are Fossil Fuels The Main Cause of Today's Global Warming?Dejan Brkić - 2009 - Facta Universitatis, Series: Linguistics and Literature 6 (1):29-38.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-12-09

Downloads
24 (#676,707)

6 months
13 (#219,505)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations