Joined: Oct. 2012
|Quote (Doc Bill @ Dec. 07 2012,16:27)|
|Quote (GaryGaulin @ Dec. 06 2012,21:42)|
|Quote (Doc Bill @ Dec. 06 2012,21:12)|
|Clueless fuckwit wrote: |
|One of the Baldwin Effect lines perhaps.|
Alec or Stephen?
If you have a problem with that then you have no idea what the potentially species altering Baldwin Effect is, or how it could here be displayed. But if you can explain it so much better then go ahead, enlighten me.
You see, GaryBillyBobDumbFuck, one of your many, many problems is that not only are you ignorant but you are incurious, too. I had to LOL that you, Supreme Programmer of the Universe (self-proclaimed) had never heard of a Monte Carlo simulation and quoted a Wiki article as if that made up for your dumbfuckery. It didn't.
And, once again, you toss out a term you have only casual acquaintance with, the Baldwin Effect, without knowing anything whatsoever about either the Effect or the esteemed Baldwin family.
You see, GaryBillyBobDumbFuck, one of the things you learn in graduate school is not only the "thing," in this case the Baldwin Effect, but the people behind the "thing," in this case the Baldwins. It must be lonely in your empty little head with all these facts and terms rattling around totally unconnected. Does it hurt?
Unfortunately, you inadvertently stumbled on something that has been researched as an emergent property of underlying physics and chemistry by none other than the fascinating Baldwin family. So, when I asked in my own way "which one" where I was referring to microscopic or macroscopic effects, obtusely, I agree, you demonstrated you usual ignorance and stupidity. It deserves correction, though.
The Baldwin family emigrated to the United States from Nottingham, England in the mid 1850's: Erasmus Edward Baldwin, RA, FRS, FCD (1838-1892) and his wife, Emma. Their son, James Mark Baldwin (1861-1934) earned a PhD in Natural History and Philosophy from Princeton and was curator of the Museum of Natural History there for many years.
James Mark was the father of Alexander Rae Baldwin (1891-1960) who settled in New York state where he was a pharmacist. Alexander plays a pivotal role in the Baldwin family history because he had twin boys: Alexander Rae Baldwin, Jr. (1927-1983) and Stephen James Baldwin (1927-2002). Alexander Junior went on to become a schoolteacher and lived in New York state. Stephen James went on to become a medical doctor and surgeon living most of his life in Boston.
Now, this is the best part!
Alexander Rae Junior had a large family, four boys and two girls, I think, but two of the boys are well-known to this day. Both Alec Baldwin (1958) and his brother, Stephen (1966) are actors and figure prominently in television, movies and the tabloids.
Lesser known are Stephen James' boys also named Alec (1959) and Stephen (1966) who were named after their cousins. Alexander Junior and his twin brother Stephen were very close right up to Alexander's untimely death from cancer in 1983.
However, the other Baldwin brothers took a different path with Alec earning a PhD in Microbiology and Stephen earning a double PhD in Evolutionary Biology and Psychology. Alec works for the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta while Stephen is with the National Institute of Health in Maryland. Both Baldwins have been instrumental in providing experimental support for their grandfather's work on what has become known as the Baldwin Effect.
At the CDC, Alec has published papers demonstrating an epigenetic emergent property resulting from mutations that lead to disease resistance in bacteria, in essence, a "culture communication" that hasn't been fully elucidated. While over at the NIH Stephen has been researching how some plant populations seem to "outrun" drought conditions faster than random mutation and natural selection would allow. Again, both Baldwins have extended their grandfather's work with Alec working on the microscopic scale and Stephen concentrating on macroscopic effects. Both scientists are doing work on what they have called "population intelligence" which is an emergent property of underlying causes. Whether "population intelligence" drives natural selection, is influenced by natural selection or is independent of it is not known at this time, although the results observed so far do not support "independent."
And that, as they say, is the rest of the story. Science is really fascinating but not as fascinating as the people who do science and the twists and turns their families take.
You see, PaulHarveyDocBill, out of your many, many ineptitudes, at least that one is a curious reply. The first part makes it good thing I have a radio broadcasting school/experience way of looking at your degrading drivel as good for ratings, so protest onward, all you want.
I don’t know everything. But at least I know a good “Effect” when I see one, after finding it in a Talk Rational thread that then went on, and on, because of it.
From what Google found it looks like you wrote the second to the last paragraph, not copy/past from something you found online. I have to give that an A+ for explaining why I found the Baldwin Effect so inescapable, for all who know enough about it, to have become another moth to its flame. Wikipedia has this where I highlight where the enlightenment lead the premise of the Theory of Intelligent Design, and for sake of science I go where that goes, no matter what:
The Baldwin effect, also known as Baldwinian evolution or ontogenic evolution, is a theory of a possible evolutionary process that was originally put forward in 1896 in a paper, "A New Factor in Evolution," by Americanpsychologist James Mark Baldwin. The paper proposed a mechanism for specific selection for general learning ability. Selected offspring would tend to have an increased capacity for learning new skills rather than being confined to genetically coded, relatively fixed abilities. In effect, it places emphasis on the fact that the sustained behavior of a species or group can shape the evolution of that species. The "Baldwin effect" is better understood in evo-devo (evolutionary developmental biology) literature as a scenario in which a character or trait change occurring in an organism as a result of its interaction with its environment becomes gradually assimilated into its developmental genetic or epigenetic repertoire (Simpson, 1953; Newman, 2002). In the words of Daniel Dennett,
Thanks to the Baldwin effect, species can be said to pretest the efficacy of particular different designs by phenotypic (individual) exploration of the space of nearby possibilities. If a particularly winning setting is thereby discovered, this discovery will create a new selection pressure: organisms that are closer in the adaptive landscape to that discovery will have a clear advantage over those more distant. (p. 69, quoting Dennett, 1991)
I found the Baldwin Effect important enough to show in the logic of Intelligent Cause/Causation Algorithm (or ICA which has four IA in it with (for sake of theory) behavior of matter IA does not have to be intelligent to programmatically qualify as behaviorally all-knowing. I’ll show that again, so that you can see exactly where, the upper left Reciprocal Causation arrow of ICA model:
All now know exactly where the Baldwin Effect is. It's here a reciprocal causation, where A influences B and B influences A, as shown in the ICA model.
This helps explain what is so mysteriously fascinating about otherwise ho-hum in forums Baldwin Effect Theory. Without this Theory of Intelligent Design many (even me) would be lost in science not knowing where it is or how to most easily programmatically experiment with it, at home too. But other than that, it is fair to say we likely don’t know much about the details you would better know about.
The next big step for what you wrote is for me to make the second from last paragraph work in a footnote with your name on it, at the bottom of the page where the theory explains the Baldwin Effect no doubt being from, and to, the molecular intelligence (epigenetics) level as indicated in the illustration. It’s not out of place for book format that I use to put a good paragraph like that (published here is good enough). It’s too historical to be in the theory itself, but off to the side of the text, the more gallantly others carry on with the science, the better. And you can include whatever you call "Baldwin boosters" like me from cognitive/behavioral systems biology sciences, where that more or less has to be accounted for in a model or it’s woefully incomplete, in at least my book anyway.
With so much more that can be said for the influence of the Baldwin Effect Theory, I know that there is even more to the story, than that. You still get an A+ for what you have so-far. But it looks like you were not ready to finish up with a “good day”, to that one, just yet.
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.