, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I think it is an important enough point to make in the first paragraph, although if Tim and others prefer moving it to the fourth paragraph I won't object.  However, I have to say I do not read the first paragraph the same way Graft does, I see no non-sequitor.  The subject of the first sentence is not inherited traits (that is in the predicate) and the subject of the second sentence is not fact versus theory (which again is in the predicate.  The subject of the first sentence is "evolution" and the predicate provides a definition.  The subject of the second sentence is evolutionary biology - the field of academe that makes the study of evolution its object, and the source of just about all the contents of the article.  The third sentence goes on to tell us about what we learn from evolutionary biology.  This progression (define a subject, explain who studies/has expertise in it, then elaborate on this field of study) makes perfect sense to me. I don't mean to prolong any argument with Graft, but I just don't see this degrading the quality of the article or its educational value to a general readership.    |  Talk 16:30