Evolution.
Moderators: kiore, Blip, The_Metatron
pfrankinstein wrote:Cito di Pense wrote:This is very troublesome, hack. Even when you're not selected, you're selected. Not to decide is to decide.
Your framework for selection Cito.
Shall we by pure good chance surf forward into our destiny?
Objectivity. Stand back a ways. Be impartial, look at the sample.
Not this one perhaps , but I can see on reason for another. Agnostic really.
Paul.
Spearthrower wrote:
Paul - are you high as a fucking kite?
<snip.>
We all know Paul. All of us here know, without any question at all, that you are ignorant as fuck.
! |
MODNOTE Spearthrower, this post is unacceptable and is a personal attack/insult as are some of your previous ones addressed to this poster in this thread. You currently have one active warning from last month and so this is a second one. Please consider carefully before posting like this again. |
pfrankinstein wrote:
No not delusional. A most basic toe explanation first ; Or are you unable to objectively evaluate?
The three big bangs started three processes all related and connected..... who knows?
in this place there are no stupid questions If human selection emerged from natural selection, why hasn't anyone proposed before me Primal selection?
Paul.
why hasn't anyone proposed before me Primal selection?
pfrankinstein wrote:in this place there are no stupid questions If human selection emerged from natural selection, why hasn't anyone proposed before me Primal selection?
hackenslash wrote:pfrankinstein wrote:in this place there are no stupid questions If human selection emerged from natural selection, why hasn't anyone proposed before me Primal selection?
If buttered crumpets are the product of molecules and heat, why hasn't anyone before me proposed that the Oort Cloud is composed entirely of buttered crumpets?
Cito di Pense wrote:hackenslash wrote:pfrankinstein wrote:in this place there are no stupid questions If human selection emerged from natural selection, why hasn't anyone proposed before me Primal selection?
If buttered crumpets are the product of molecules and heat, why hasn't anyone before me proposed that the Oort Cloud is composed entirely of buttered crumpets?
Wait! Are you saying that... something is composed of something else?
hackenslash wrote:Cito di Pense wrote:hackenslash wrote:pfrankinstein wrote:in this place there are no stupid questions If human selection emerged from natural selection, why hasn't anyone proposed before me Primal selection?
If buttered crumpets are the product of molecules and heat, why hasn't anyone before me proposed that the Oort Cloud is composed entirely of buttered crumpets?
Wait! Are you saying that... something is composed of something else?
Emergent from it, in fact.
WooooOOOOOooooo!
Cito di Pense wrote:hackenslash wrote:pfrankinstein wrote:in this place there are no stupid questions If human selection emerged from natural selection, why hasn't anyone proposed before me Primal selection?
If buttered crumpets are the product of molecules and heat, why hasn't anyone before me proposed that the Oort Cloud is composed entirely of buttered crumpets?
Wait! Are you saying that... something is composed of something else?
pfrankinstein wrote: If human selection emerged from natural selection, why hasn't anyone proposed before me Primal selection?
pfrankinstein wrote:
I'm asking if the Darwinian process has a primitive relative or echo in the past.
pfrankinstein wrote:If not that would be kind of amazing. Something unique, brand new.
Out of the blue.
Spearthrower wrote:pfrankinstein wrote:
I'm asking if the Darwinian process has a primitive relative or echo in the past.
No, for the numerous reasons already given to you, regardless of your ability or willingness to learn.pfrankinstein wrote:If not that would be kind of amazing. Something unique, brand new.
Out of the blue.
Or inane, foolish, a load of deranged bollocks that one would need to be fucking ignorant to lend credence to.
pfrankinstein wrote:Spearthrower wrote:pfrankinstein wrote:
I'm asking if the Darwinian process has a primitive relative or echo in the past.
No, for the numerous reasons already given to you, regardless of your ability or willingness to learn.pfrankinstein wrote:If not that would be kind of amazing. Something unique, brand new.
Out of the blue.
Or inane, foolish, a load of deranged bollocks that one would need to be fucking ignorant to lend credence to.
You have resorted to name calling. Calm down. Your horns are showing.
pfrankinstein wrote:Leading theories of the day described as deranged Bollocks.
pfrankinstein wrote:We are victorian gentlemen discussing the mechanism.
pfrankinstein wrote:The Origin = A question...Basic = what caused speciation; speciation being the effect.
Baby steps with thrower.
Cause evolution ; effect speciation.
So is it entirely clear what it is you understand?
Not what you thought right. Pause for the jet.
But then mine would be a most basic understanding based on evidence.
You don't know what you're about.
Paul.
Natural selection is one of the central mechanisms of evolutionary change and is the process responsible for the evolution of adaptive features. Without a working knowledge of natural selection, it is impossible to understand how or why living things have come to exhibit their diversity and complexity. An understanding of natural selection also is becoming increasingly relevant in practical contexts, including medicine, agriculture, and resource management. Unfortunately, studies indicate that natural selection is generally very poorly understood, even among many individuals with postsecondary biological education. This paper provides an overview of the basic process of natural selection, discusses the extent and possible causes of misunderstandings of the process, and presents a review of the most common misconceptions that must be corrected before a functional understanding of natural selection and adaptive evolution can be achieved.
Natural selection is a non-random difference in reproductive output among replicating entities, often due indirectly to differences in survival in a particular environment, leading to an increase in the proportion of beneficial, heritable characteristics within a population from one generation to the next.
pfrankinstein wrote:Cito di Pense wrote:hackenslash wrote:pfrankinstein wrote:in this place there are no stupid questions If human selection emerged from natural selection, why hasn't anyone proposed before me Primal selection?
If buttered crumpets are the product of molecules and heat, why hasn't anyone before me proposed that the Oort Cloud is composed entirely of buttered crumpets?
Wait! Are you saying that... something is composed of something else?
I'm asking if the Darwinian process has a primitive relative or echo in the past.
Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 3 guests