Natural Selection has basically been consigned to dustbin of history has it not? Maybe just the circles I run (around) in.
yeah, maybe just your circles...
Natural Selection has basically been consigned to dustbin of history has it not? Maybe just the circles I run (around) in.
Nice to hear you moved on. I should be off to teach in Europe, once I'm done taking my time with school, but people seem to get stuck here... maybe because most of their friends never leave. Never quite got why Orange County natives never venture out, but it seems to be a thing here.
i honestly couldn't wait to get out.
taking time with school is a good thing, though. good luck with your studies and travels.
Yeah, I like those spots. I'm right around the corner from the Continental myself, by old town Fullerton. I do really like it here... not bad at all for Orange County.
first apt i had was near there, as well. Truslow. close to the train station and what used to be the Hub. for OC, Fullerton was not so bad, college town feel to it/personality.
nothing to do with Darwinian evolution.
i do find it funny how much people have invested in evolution.
i can understand it in a way. the creationists are so comically thick and evil and viscious that it makes everyone with an ounce of sense rally behind the darwin banner.
that sort of thing is strategically stupid though. like if i'd become a commie during the cold war cos i didn't like americans or soemthing.
I'm sorry, but Selection only goes so far into explaining many of the complex phenomena we can observe in nature, in ours & other species.
... because it's, you know, real. ...
Can you give me an example of some complex natural phenomenon, supposedly explained by natural selection, that cannot in fact be explained in that way?
I would say, roughly, about 99% of the things every human being is doing, right now
Tree lobsters are a great example. There are several species that are almost totally unrelated but evolved in similar circumstances to similar ends. On tiny islands floating in the middle of the Pacific. So you have several, similar, systems with a limited amount of connections between elements in those systems, ending up with unrelated but similar results.
That works fine under controlled conditions, when organisms find themselves in (increasingly) complex & dense systems it doesn't work so well. Selection is still at work but there are so many differant factors at play it becomes impossiable to say condition A led to mutation B which was selected over X, Y & Z because of C.
Thats the idea behind 'Intelligent Design' or whatever the nouveu riche bible bashers are calling it isnt it?
Natural Selection has basically been consigned to dustbin of history has it not? Maybe just the circles I run (around) in. You get all these wierd permutations like Group Selection blahblahblah & end up at the gas chamber, not a good look.
It has a really hard time explaining alot of (pretty) universal traits, the panopoly of self destruction. Bataille did more to describe that than any Darwinist ever could.
The idea that evoloution is silentally moving us 'forward' towards bigger & better mutations is obv. bollocks. Burroughs interpolated that if a virus & the host reach a point where each party is mutally benefiting from the arrangment then the virus ceases to be a virus, or seen as a virus. This can be anything, from The Word, to Love.
Any system where there are as many connections as discrete elements approachs chaos.
That goes alot further, for me, to describing what we've been observing in the natural world.
Of course Evolution is a belif system, comprable to one of the 'big 3' - this doesn't mean that the idea of evolution isnt constanly shifting its parameters or make it any less 'true' or 'false' Likewise, just cos I don't believe in their book doesn't undermine the relevance of 2000+ years of lived experiance.
& this is the exact moment that science becomes religion.
Tree lobsters are a great example. There are several species that are almost totally unrelated but evolved in similar circumstances to similar ends. On tiny islands floating in the middle of the Pacific. So you have several, similar, systems with a limited amount of connections between elements in those systems, ending up with unrelated but similar results.
Thats the idea behind 'Intelligent Design' or whatever the nouveu riche bible bashers are calling it isnt it?
Natural Selection has basically been consigned to dustbin of history has it not? Maybe just the circles I run (around) in. You get all these wierd permutations like Group Selection blahblahblah & end up at the gas chamber, not a good look.
It has a really hard time explaining alot of (pretty) universal traits, the panopoly of self destruction. Bataille did more to describe that than any Darwinist ever could.
The idea that evoloution is silentally moving us 'forward' towards bigger & better mutations is obv. bollocks. Burroughs interpolated that if a virus & the host reach a point where each party is mutally benefiting from the arrangment then the virus ceases to be a virus, or seen as a virus. This can be anything, from The Word, to Love.
Any system where there are as many connections as discrete elements approachs chaos.
That goes alot further, for me, to describing what we've been observing in the natural world.
Of course Evolution is a belif system, comprable to one of the 'big 3' - this doesn't mean that the idea of evolution isnt constanly shifting its parameters or make it any less 'true' or 'false' Likewise, just cos I don't believe in their book doesn't undermine the relevance of 2000+ years of lived experiance.
How so? Is you definition of 'religion' equivalent to knowing facts? There is a huge body of evidence in favour of evolution by natural selection, and so far there's been no serious, rigorous research that contradicts it. To accept something as true when it's as well-supported as that is not religion, it's the complete opposite of religion. Religion revolves wholly around blind faith and received wisdom, it's completely antithetical to empiricism.
I would say, roughly, about 99% of the things every human being is doing, right now. Sorry, it does look in previous posts as tho I'm saying selection doesn't exist at all, of course it does, but I don't think it has the first & last say that it has had in the past.
Tree lobsters are a great example. There are several species that are almost totally unrelated but evolved in similar circumstances to similar ends. On tiny islands floating in the middle of the Pacific. So you have several, similar, systems with a limited amount of connections between elements in those systems, ending up with unrelated but similar results.
That works fine under controlled conditions, when organisms find themselves in (increasingly) complex & dense systems it doesn't work so well. Selection is still at work but there are so many differant factors at play it becomes impossiable to say condition A led to mutation B which was selected over X, Y & Z because of C.
Can you give me an example of some complex natural phenomenon, supposedly explained by natural selection, that cannot in fact be explained in that way?