Spearthrower wrote:

The_Piper wrote:The Knights Who Say N¡?

The artist formerly known as revaluatioN¡

Suppose for a moment my tree of a kind beat your ace ?

Shall we reduce the sample down to its constant parts and divide?.

Paul.

pfrankinstein wrote:Charles Darwin proposed a process with a mechanism.

Where is the harm in the cognition?

https://thinkzone.wlonk.com/Gibber/GibGen.htm

Where is the harm in the cognition? Charm in the cognition? Charm in proposed a mechanism.

Where is the cognition? Charles Darwin process with a proposed a proposed a process with a process with a proposed a mechanism.

Where is the cognition? Charles Darwin the cognition? Charm in proposed a process with a process with a mechanism.

Where is the cognition? Charm in the cognition? Charles Darwin the cognition? Charles Darwin the harles Darwin process with a process with a proposed a proposed a mech

pfrankinstein wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:

The_Piper wrote:The Knights Who Say N¡?

The artist formerly known as revaluatioN¡

Suppose for a moment my tree of a kind beat your ace ?

Shall we reduce the sample down to its constant parts and divide?.

https://thinkzone.wlonk.com/Gibber/GibGen.htm

Shall we reduce the sample down to its constant my tree of a moment parts constant parts constant my tree of a moment my tree of a moment my tree of a kind beat your ace ?

Shall we reduce ?

Shall we reduce ?

Shall we reduce ?

Shall we reduce the sample down to its and beat your a moment parts and divide?.
Suppose for ace the sample down to its constant parts constant parts constant my tree of a moment my tree of a kind beat your a kind beat your a kind beat your ace ?

Shall we reduce the sampl

Spearthrower wrote:

pfrankinstein wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:

The_Piper wrote:The Knights Who Say N¡?

The artist formerly known as revaluatioN¡

Suppose for a moment my tree of a kind beat your ace ?

Shall we reduce the sample down to its constant parts and divide?.

https://thinkzone.wlonk.com/Gibber/GibGen.htm

Shall we reduce the sample down to its constant my tree of a moment parts constant parts constant my tree of a moment my tree of a moment my tree of a kind beat your ace ?

Shall we reduce ?

Shall we reduce ?

Shall we reduce ?

Shall we reduce the sample down to its and beat your a moment parts and divide?.
Suppose for ace the sample down to its constant parts constant parts constant my tree of a moment my tree of a kind beat your a kind beat your a kind beat your ace ?

Shall we reduce the sampl

Shall we envisage the solar system evolving by means of primal selection?

Go take a peek needle Dickensian.

Paul.

Selection and process fever.
I see myself as reaffirming basic Darwinian truths.
If a calculation by a small amount at the start is slightly out. Well.

The clarification of human selection over artificial and its placement is a basic observed fact.

Paul

Spearthrower wrote:

pfrankinstein wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:

The_Piper wrote:The Knights Who Say N¡?

The artist formerly known as revaluatioN¡

Suppose for a moment my tree of a kind beat your ace ?

Shall we reduce the sample down to its constant parts and divide?.

https://thinkzone.wlonk.com/Gibber/GibGen.htm

Shall we reduce the sample down to its constant my tree of a moment parts constant parts constant my tree of a moment my tree of a moment my tree of a kind beat your ace ?

Shall we reduce ?

Shall we reduce ?

Shall we reduce ?

Shall we reduce the sample down to its and beat your a moment parts and divide?.
Suppose for ace the sample down to its constant parts constant parts constant my tree of a moment my tree of a kind beat your a kind beat your a kind beat your ace ?

Shall we reduce the sampl

Bit of a writer you thrower... Do you read anything into Darwin playing music to worms?
Paul

put (something) to rights To restore or arrange something to its proper, natural, or original state or condition...
Ripped off the web;

You be me putting science to rights in this day and age.

Paul.

pfrankinstein wrote:
Shall we envisage the solar system evolving by means of primal selection?

Go take a peek needle Dickensian.

https://thinkzone.wlonk.com/Gibber/GibGen.htm

Dicke Dicke sele a primall we solving by means of peek needlection?

Go the solar sele a peek needle system evolar solar system evolar solvisage take evolvisage a peedle solvisage the a primall we a peek neek needlection?

Go take a peek neek neek needlection?

Go the a primall we enving by mean. Shal we the system enving by means of primal we ens of primall solar solvisage a peedle Dickenvisage Dicke Dickensian. Shall system evolving by mean. Shall system evolar system ens of primall selection?

G

pfrankinstein wrote:put (something) to rights To restore or arrange something to its proper, natural, or original state or condition...
Ripped off the web;

You be me putting science to rights in this day and age.

https://thinkzone.wlonk.com/Gibber/GibGen.htm

You be me putting science to its in thing to its in thing science to restore or or condition...
Ripped off thing) to riginal state or arrange something) to restore or orights in the web;

You be me put (something) to its To riginal state or condition...
Ripped off the web;

You be me putting science to riginal state or arrange something to its proper, natural, or condition...
Ripped off the web;

You be me put (somethis day and age. putting to rights in thing science to rights in the web;

You be me

pfrankinstein wrote:

The_Piper wrote:The Knights Who Say N¡?

Hi ppier what do you know about the subject of EVOLUTION?

Paul

I am fairly competent in adaptive systems. Ask me a question

BWE wrote:

pfrankinstein wrote:

The_Piper wrote:The Knights Who Say N¡?

Hi ppier what do you know about the subject of EVOLUTION?

Paul

I am fairly competent in adaptive systems. Ask me a question

Oh, I have one:

The big bang a single beginning denotes a single process, the process = evolution.


Not a question, you say? Adapt!

pfrankinstein wrote:Why should I be bruised.

Shall we but heads, shall I defend myself by repetition.

EVOLUTION is a PROCESS.

Process… By Darwinian understanding, EVOLUTION is a PROCESS. Direct Counter: evolves by Charles Darwinian understanding, EVOLUTION into science law stacked on the man who played music to works… Process... By Darwinian? I'm deluded, your’s joke. The man who played games around its basic sumption reside’s. Direct Counter: evolution… Process... You know; kind of a less as such, it can not a PROCESS. Shall games around its basic sump revolves by Charles Darwinian? Very much torn me. I know our solar evolves by the MECHANISM... I see it... Am I trying to convince you of a less real reality. You should give that question some thought. How much of your analytical thinking is meme evolution.

pfrankinstein wrote:

The_Piper wrote:The Knights Who Say N¡?

Hi ppier what do you know about the subject of EVOLUTION?

Paul

Whatever's in The Selfish Gene, or on popular science programs/podcasts.

Spearthrower wrote:

BWE wrote:

pfrankinstein wrote:

The_Piper wrote:The Knights Who Say N¡?

Hi ppier what do you know about the subject of EVOLUTION?

Paul

I am fairly competent in adaptive systems. Ask me a question

Oh, I have one:

The big bang a single beginning denotes a single process, the process = evolution.


Not a question, you say? Adapt!

I didn't feel like I telegraphed that quite so blatantly

Are you boys all having a nice time? Would you like some crisps and some fizzy orangeade? Don't forget to put all this away when you've finished playing.

We'll be out on the verandah drinking tea and talking in peace.

Got any beer out there?

Well done for remembering Luxembourgish Mothers' Day. You laid the table for us very nicely. Now run along. That Paul boy has a process that he wants to show you.

It's time for crumpets.

It's always time for crumpets.

Crumpetdom existed since the Big Bang - we just discovered them lounging about tastily in Platonic space and harnessed their crispy, buttery, toasted power.

Spearthrower wrote:It's time for crumpets.

It's always time for crumpets.

Crumpetdom existed since the Big Bang - we just discovered them lounging about tastily in Platonic space and harnessed their crispy, buttery, toasted power.

Will you be drawn on a point of order..
Your unbiased opinion is required sir.

Charles Darwin incorrectly labelled a black bird, a humming bird and wren. Turned out the specimens were all types of finch. He also neglected to record the islands where he got his samples.

Not totally infallible the man.

Your mishmash understanding needs fine tuneing at grass roots level.

So I propose you sharpen your pencil. Natural selection, human SELECTION, artificial selection.

That be a more precise reflection/explanation of the observed evidence.

But refuse to be drawn on specific s. Your a let down thrower.

Paul.

Your unbiased opinion is required sir.

Toasted, with lashings of butter. And make it snappy, chappy.