RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (16) < ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 >   
  Topic: Frontloading--Dumbest Idea Evar?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 11 2007,10:53   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Aug. 11 2007,08:25)
VMartin, if you think 'Darwinism' can't explain snail shells, what DO you think the explanation is?

DO YOU HAVE AN EXPLANATION?

God made snail shells.  Then he died.

(snicker)  (giggle)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2007,14:57   

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank

?
Quote


God made snail shells. ?Then he died.

(snicker) ?(giggle)


Let us consider another possibility - it was Natural selection which created snails and slugs. Now we may try to use darwinian dialectic to explain why slugs do not have their shells anymore and snails still posseses them. We are going to use darwinian dialectic from darwinian explanation of hoverfly mimicry:


Species with relatively slow unaccomplished flight may be placed under strong selection for high-quality mimicry bla bla bla...

? ?
Because slugs do not have shells they are a little bit faster than snails (they are more aerodynamic you know). ?They make 1500 mm an hour but snails make only 1498 mm an hour. This difference give slugs a little advantage when hunting by predators . Even though scientifically undetectable, such small advantage over millions and millions of years surely have led to preservation of snail's shells and diminishing of slugs' shells.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2007,15:23   

Quote (VMartin @ Aug. 16 2007,14:57)
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank

? ?
Quote


God made snail shells. ?Then he died.

(snicker) ?(giggle)


Let us consider another possibility - it was Natural selection which created snails and slugs. Now we may try to use darwinian dialectic to explain why slugs do not have their shells anymore and snails still posseses them. We are going to use darwinian dialectic from darwinian explanation of hoverfly mimicry:


Species with relatively slow unaccomplished flight may be placed under strong selection for high-quality mimicry bla bla bla...

? ?
Because slugs do not have shells they are a little bit faster than snails (they are more aerodynamic you know). ?They make 1500 mm an hour but snails make only 1498 mm an hour. This difference give slugs a little advantage when hunting by predators . Even though scientifically undetectable, such small advantage over millions and millions of years surely have led to preservation of snail's shells and diminishing of slugs' shells.

Quote
Now we may try to use darwinian dialectic


Cute. VMartin still thinks calling Darwinists Communists is going to impress people. I guess he's a little behind the rest of the Western world here.

Hey, V, you seem not to think natural selection can explain things like snail shells, yet why won't you let us know what the correct explanation is? Is there some reason for this reluctance on your part?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Henry J



Posts: 3999
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2007,15:32   

If anybody wants a guess from an amateur, I'd guess that slugs rely more on shelter (i.e., being under things), whereas snails carry a partial shelter around with them. But that's at a cost; building that shell, and putting out the energy needed to carry it while moving around - slugs aren't paying that cost; their way works for them (yucky as it is), else they'd be extinct by now.

Just my two cents.

Henry

  
JohnW



Posts: 2197
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2007,15:49   

Slugs also rely on tasting nasty.  Very few predators will touch them.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2007,00:17   

Quote (JohnW @ Aug. 16 2007,15:49)
Slugs also rely on tasting nasty. ?Very few predators will touch them.

Oh, really? I would say it is only a darwinian bullshit for children in school how to explain reality not fitting into ?"natural selection" armchair preconcptions. ?

 
Quote

These results represent the only known case of a European slug proving to be toxic to potential predators, and is one of a very small number of reported instances of possible toxicity amongst terrestrial gastropods.

.
.
.

Slugs are known to be killed and consumed by a range of invertebrate and vertebrate predators in the field.


The quotation above is from Journal of Molluscan studies, Oxfordjournals. ?

http://mollus.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/63/4/541

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2007,00:23   

Quote (VMartin @ Aug. 17 2007,00:17)
?
Quote (JohnW @ Aug. 16 2007,15:49)
Slugs also rely on tasting nasty. ?Very few predators will touch them.

Oh, really? I would say it is only a darwinian bullshit for children in school how to explain reality not fitting into ?"natural selection" armchair preconcptions. ?

? ?  
Quote

These results represent the only known case of a European slug proving to be toxic to potential predators, and is one of a very small number of reported instances of possible toxicity amongst terrestrial gastropods.

.
.
.

Slugs are known to be killed and consumed by a range of invertebrate and vertebrate predators in the field.


The quotation above is from Journal of Molluscan studies, Oxfordjournals. ?

http://mollus.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/63/4/541

Hey, V, since natural selection supposedly can't explain snail shells, why don't you tell us what the correct explanation is?

You do HAVE an explanation, right V?

(Remember, calling us Communists doesn't count.)

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4465
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2007,01:23   

VMartin's clue of the week:

Niche.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
JohnW



Posts: 2197
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2007,10:59   

Quote (VMartin @ Aug. 16 2007,22:17)
Quote (JohnW @ Aug. 16 2007,15:49)
Slugs also rely on tasting nasty. ?Very few predators will touch them.

Oh, really? I would say it is only a darwinian bullshit for children in school how to explain reality not fitting into ?"natural selection" armchair preconcptions. ?

?
Quote

These results represent the only known case of a European slug proving to be toxic to potential predators, and is one of a very small number of reported instances of possible toxicity amongst terrestrial gastropods.

.
.
.

Slugs are known to be killed and consumed by a range of invertebrate and vertebrate predators in the field.


The quotation above is from Journal of Molluscan studies, Oxfordjournals. ?

http://mollus.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/63/4/541

And how does the range of slug predators compare with the range of snail predators?  I assume you've studied this in the process of coming up with your "better than darwinian bullshit" explanation.  After all, you do have an explanation, yes?

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1365
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2007,11:54   

Quote (Henry J @ Aug. 16 2007,10:32)
If anybody wants a guess from an amateur, I'd guess that slugs rely more on shelter (i.e., being under things), whereas snails carry a partial shelter around with them. But that's at a cost; building that shell, and putting out the energy needed to carry it while moving around - slugs aren't paying that cost; their way works for them (yucky as it is), else they'd be extinct by now.

Just my two cents.

Henry

Me, miss! Me, miss!

Where I live, during hot, dry conditions, in daytime, you find many snails with opercula tightly closed in vegetation such as vines about 1 metre from the ground. The strategy seems to help avoid dessication, as the ground surface can become much hotter than the air above. The shell is an essential element in this strategy, and may enable snails to thrive in drier climates. I have not seen a slug here, and our lettuces do very well.

PS among all the other questions that I am sure you will be soon getting around to answer, when you have time, please don't forget:
VMartin:

   
Quote

I am not sure of that but the fact of DNA preserved after 70. milion years is very weird, isn't it?



I suspect that DNA allegedly from dinosaur bones was actually a contaminant. But don't take my word for it.

   
Quote

I suspect that DNA allegedly from dinosaur bones was actually a contaminant.

-John A. Davison. link

PPS

  
stephenWells



Posts: 127
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2007,15:56   

Quote (Alan Fox @ Aug. 17 2007,11:54)

Where I live, during hot, dry conditions, in daytime, you find many snails with opercula tightly closed in vegetation such as vines about 1 metre from the ground. The strategy seems to help avoid dessication, as the ground surface can become much hotter than the air above. The shell is an essential element in this strategy, and may enable snails to thrive in drier climates. I have not seen a slug here, and our lettuces do very well.

Whereas in a very damp German forest recently, I saw very large numbers of both slugs and snails, with the slugs being particularly prevalent in the deep, shady leaf-litter, and the snails being more prevalent in the leafy bushes. Indeed, I saw a large snail eating a leaf with enough voracity that I actually heard the rasping of its radula.

So it seems we have a niche for creatures that rely on damp concealed conditions, and don't bother with the energetic investment of building a shell, and others which do build a shell and can occupy a broader range of environments.

Which we all knew, except VMartin.

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 23 2007,12:47   

John Davison has written in his Manifesto:

Quote

The actual facts are as follows. In birds the cells destined to become the germ cells first appear in the extra-embryonic endoderm (germinal crescent) anterior to the head of the developing embryo.
Incidentally, this region has no homologue in the hatched bird as the extra-embryonic endoderm is, by definition, resorbed as nutrient for the developing chick. From there the presumptive germ cells enter the circulatory system and, after a period of time in the bloodstream, penetrate the walls of the venous circulation and invade the gonad where they differentiate into the definitive gametes. In mammals the presumptive germ cells first appear in the endoderm of the allantois, a structure destined to become the urinary bladder of the adult. From here they migrate in amoeboid fashion anteriorly and laterally to reach the gonad where they complete their differentiation. Thus, there is no way that the reproductive cells of mammals can be homologized with those of birds as they originate from opposite ends of the embryonic axis and reach the gonads by completely different means.


Adolf Portmann adressed almost the same problem from another point of view. Because all of you are excellent linguists I suppose you have no problem reading German. I quoted from Adolf Portmann's "Biologie und Geist - Die Biologie und das Phanomen des Geistigen", Zurich 1956, page 22:

Quote

Verfolgt man nun in dieser naturlichen Serien von Tiertypen die Lage der mannlichen Keimdrusen, dann stellen wir fest, dass diese Hoden in der aufsteigenden Reihe vom Fisch zum Sauger aus der vorderen Rumpfzone oder der Rumpfmitte mehr becken-, ja leistenstandig werden, um schliesslich in einem Hodensack ausserhalb der Leibsholle in geradezu paradoxer ?Situation am analen Korperpol eingelagert zu werden.


Whats more important Adolf Portmann didn't see any plausible "selection" explanation of it:

Quote

...dass es keine Theorie gibt, welche das Phanomen des <<Descensus>>, des Hodenabstiegs, erklart. Die Erscheinung ist ist um so beachtenswerter, als keine Moglichket gibt, die Entstehung dieses Gebildes durch Selektion zu erklaren.



Perhaps the prominent Swiss professor didn't hear about "niche"?

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 23 2007,12:56   

Hey, "V", now that you're back, can you please share with us what YOU think is the correct explanation of snail shells, since you evidently think that the Darwinian/Marxist explanation won't work?

You see, V, it's a little weird: you've been badmouthing "Darwinism" and calling evolutionists Communists here for months, yet you've never explained what exactly your alternative to natural selection is. Do you actually HAVE one? Is it identical to JD's "God did it, then died", theory, or is it different?

Please share, V! We're reaching out to you?

(Don't just call us communists or quote Javison. That's not what we're asking for.)

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 23 2007,15:08   

Damn, who left the door open and let the cackling chicken in again?

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 23 2007,15:10   

Quote (VMartin @ Aug. 23 2007,12:47)
John Davison has written in his Manifesto:

"A specter is haunting Europe -- the specter of anti-science nutjobs" . . . . ?

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 23 2007,15:12   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Aug. 23 2007,12:56)
Don't just call us communists

Well, you can call  *me*  a commie, V.  I don't mind.

Here, I'll even do it for you ------  "Lenny is a commie!  A big hairy erect commie!"

Happy now?

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 23 2007,15:40   

Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ Aug. 23 2007,15:12)
 
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Aug. 23 2007,12:56)
Don't just call us communists

Well, you can call ?*me* ?a commie, V. ?I don't mind.

Here, I'll even do it for you ------ ?"Lenny is a commie! ?A big hairy erect commie!"

Happy now?

Okay, V, I revise my statement. Call Lenny a commie all you want. Even call him 'hairy' and 'erect'. :p

But for the rest of us, let's just say it doesn't strengthen your, um, 'argument' any.

(Tho truth be told, I don't recall you advancing many arguments except for "DARWIN IS WICKED STALINIST!")

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Henry J



Posts: 3999
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 23 2007,20:04   

Being "hairy" is a correctable condition. :p

Henry

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 23 2007,20:54   

Quote (Henry J @ Aug. 23 2007,20:04)
Being "hairy" is a correctable condition. :p

Henry

So is being "erect".


(big fat evil grin)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
k.e



Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 23 2007,21:15   

Quote
Indeed, I saw a large snail eating a leaf with enough voracity that I actually heard the rasping of its radula.


Ha, that wasn't eating it was trying to communicate with you. What do you think it was saying?

--------------
The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4465
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 23 2007,21:21   

Quote

Perhaps the prominent Swiss professor didn't hear about "niche"?


VMartin actually gets something right. Stopped clocks and all that. The quote was from 1956. The classic paper introducing the biological niche concept was published by G.E. Hutchinson in... 1957.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 24 2007,06:57   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Aug. 23 2007,21:21)
? ?
Quote

Perhaps the prominent Swiss professor didn't hear about "niche"?


VMartin actually gets something right. Stopped clocks and all that. The quote was from 1956. The classic paper introducing the biological niche concept was published by G.E. Hutchinson in... 1957.


Portmann published the article first in 1949 in fact.

Probably the problem has nothing to do with "niche". (As probably also the explanation of disappearance/retaining of snail's shells are only unproved "niche" explanation as well).

Doctor Myers addressed the same problem mentioned by Portmann here (in reality he quotes only some scientific source where he added some unsuitable, would- be "funny" remarks. What a difference to cultivated Portmann.):

http://pharyngula.org/index/weblog/comments/descent_of_the_testicle/

Doctor Myers and authors of the research didn't mention "niche" there. Reading the article we see, that no new explanation of descent of testicles appeared that Portmann was not aware of in his time. Some of the most weird neodarwinian explanations dismissed doctor Myers himself. Yet he has written:

 
Quote

The temperature hypothesis. The most likely explanation is that there is something in the function of the testis that is optimized for a lower temperature, and that the clumsy kludge that evolved to reduce that temperature was to let the organ hang out in the breeze.


Oddly enough birds having temperature 4 grad Celsius higher than mammals haven't solved the same problem this way.

Elephants living in very hot areas of the world keep their
testicles in their body cavity. But many mammals living in the same area - (or niche?) - have testicles descended and scrotal.

Obviously neodarwinism is groping in the case and all the "temperature" explanation is more a product of imagination as a real underestanding of the evolutionary processes leading to the observed reality -descent and moving of mammalian's males organs of reproduction to the back parts and outside of the body.

----
Animals like sharks solved problem of keeping great temperature differences inside their bodies:

Quote

This way, these sharks have temperatures of 14?C above the water, while the heart and gills remain at sea-temperature, enabling them to hunt such rapid and agile prey like marine mammals.


--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 24 2007,07:05   

Quote
Obviously neodarwinism is groping in the case and all the "temperature" explanation is more a product of imagination as a real underestanding of the evolutionary processes leading to the observed reality -descent and moving of mammalian's males organs of reproduction to the back parts and outside of the body.


what's your explanation of this observed reality VMartin?

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gaugerís work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4465
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 24 2007,07:38   

A dramatic lack of focus, VMartin.

You brought up whether Portmann was aware of the niche concept. 1949 still predates 1957.

You also were blithering on about snails vs. slugs at the time you were handed the clue about niche, not testicular placement. Try not to wander off the page again, OK?

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 24 2007,12:05   

My opinion is that niche play almost no role in evolution. Evolution on my opinion is governed by processes different from those proposed by darwinism. Such directed evolution is called Orthogenesis.

I supposed that dispute about snails vs slugs was over.
Alan Fox mentioned snails resting on grapevein and another man saw snails and slugs in German forests. I saw both snails and slugs in the garden.

In many sources inquiring snails and slugs they are mentioned together as regard their habitats. But because in the same habitat live so different animals like wolfs and deers I think that habitat (or niche in the case) discussion would be endless.

I wanted only to emphasize that becoming slugs from snails is process that involve not only disappearance of shells. It requires the rearrangements of internal organs that matched perfectly mantel cavity of snails. It requires also detorsion.

I have mentioned that (in fact I quoted a German morphogist) shell should arose at once, by saltus because partial shell has no meaning.

Now I quoted A.Portmann in regard of another problem where niche obviously play no role. At least modern research do not mention it. I suppose it is more open for discussion.

I would say that blithering is more on the part of "Rev Dr" Lenny Flank and the others, who do not contribute to discussion anything except nonsenses.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 24 2007,12:08   

Speaking of 'contributing', VMartin...

Quote
Evolution on my opinion is governed by processes different from those proposed by darwinism.


And what precisely are those processes?

Don't just drop Davison's buzz words. Explain what YOU think.

Put up or shut up.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 24 2007,12:34   

Quote

Put up or shut up.


Why do you think you can command me what to do?
Do you think you are admin here? The most probable is that you only suffer from delusion of grandeur. Don't read Selfish gene so often.

Remember: it is darwinism here on trial not me.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 24 2007,12:48   

Quote (VMartin @ Aug. 24 2007,12:34)
Quote

Put up or shut up.


Why do you think you can command me what to do?
Do you think you are admin here? The most probable is that you only suffer from delusion of grandeur. Don't read Selfish gene so often.

Remember: it is darwinism here on trial not me.

About what I expected. Coward.

VMartin, answer this:

Do you HAVE an alternative to 'Darwinism', or is it just that you're afraid to say what it is?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 24 2007,12:59   

Well, I see that Brave Sir VMartin has already bravely run away, buggered off, skarkered:

?
Quote
24 guests, 9 Public Members and 2 Anonymous Members ? [ View Complete List ]
>Arden Chatfield >carlsonjok >Kristine >ck1 >eTourist >Stephen Elliott >Reciprocating Bill >Dazza McTrazza >Zachriel


Gee, my Master's orals were pretty rough. Would have been a lot easier if I'd known I could have short-circuited the whole process by replying "Why do you think you can command me what to do?"

Over in three minutes!

EDIT:

Ooh, he's back now!

Quote
21 guests, 11 Public Members and 1 Anonymous Members ? [ View Complete List ]
>Arden Chatfield >carlsonjok >eTourist >Hermagoras >franky172 >ppb >VMartin >mitschlag >Erasmus, FCD >Kristine >ck1


Martin, talk to us!

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 24 2007,13:19   

Quote

About what I expected. Coward.


Strong words. I suppose that you account yourself to be a fearless knight. Especially when you are repeating darwinian mantras like a parrot. You feel like a Rambo.



(Btw. is it not interesting that parrot can reproduce human speech very good but our relatives - primates are unanble to do so? Obviously voice is another deep puzzle of evolution of humans).

Quote

Do you HAVE an alternative to 'Darwinism', or is it just that you're afraid to say what it is?


Farnkly speaking I am still seeking. John Davison's Manifesto is very good and incentive source (btw John Davison makes some interesting comments about discussion here at ISCID).
He is not only critic but proposed his own mechanism of semi-meiosis which is very original. The most scientists I know about propose nothing. ?


Another my sources are scientists challenging darwinian explanation of mimicry like Heikertinger, Punnet, Goldschmidt etc... German morphologists, biological structuralism and Adolf Portmann's conception of self-representation and "Innerlichkeit".

Read it yourself instead of asking me. Life and forces behind it's development are much more complicated to be reduced to neodarwinian explanation.

I have tried to put some of puzzles mentioned by prominent scientists here.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
  456 replies since June 10 2007,22:48 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (16) < ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]