One bang one process.

romansh · **#4061** by **romansh** » Jan 19, 2023 7:55 pm

pfrankinstein wrote:Let's put an end to the argument. NS stands for "artificial selection." Both mean the same, capsulation interchangeable.

We'd be correcting and updating Charles Darwin by observation.

He was a man trapped in his time. He edged his bet; artificial selection takes the "thinker out of the funker."

We can look at nature without being part of it. His idea was already a dangerous one. the Common ancester.

Human less one for politics of the day.

Primal selection, natural selection, human selection, and then, with the benefit of hindsight, looking forward, artificial selection.

It is an observation: nature was making selection before NS.

Proto plantary disc, Solar systems, stratigraphy, by means of Primal selection. Rafts of evidence.

Paul.

Have a go at answering a simple question please Do snowflakes replicate? Easy peasy for an intellect like yours.

pfrankinstein · **#4062** by **pfrankinstein** » Jan 20, 2023 1:28 am

romansh wrote:
pfrankinstein wrote:Let's put an end to the argument. NS stands for "artificial selection." Both mean the same, capsulation interchangeable.

We'd be correcting and updating Charles Darwin by observation.

He was a man trapped in his time. He edged his bet; artificial selection takes the "thinker out of the funker."

We can look at nature without being part of it. His idea was already a dangerous one. the Common ancester.

Human less one for politics of the day.

Primal selection, natural selection, human selection, and then, with the benefit of hindsight, looking forward, artificial selection.

It is an observation: nature was making selection before NS.

Proto plantary disc, Solar systems, stratigraphy, by means of Primal selection. Rafts of evidence.

Paul.

Have a go at answering a simple question please Do snowflakes replicate? Easy peasy for an intellect like yours.

pfrankinstein · **#4063** by **pfrankinstein** » Jan 23, 2023 8:53 pm

Because of this, the kinship between species is often described in terms of a 'tree of life,' where every branch constitutes a species. Now, researchers have found that evolution is more complex than this model would have it, and that the tree is actually more akin to a bush.18 Aug 2015
https://www.sciencedaily.com › 201...
The Tree of Life may be more like a bush - ScienceDaily

Paul.

Greg the Grouper · **#4064** by **Greg the Grouper** » Jan 23, 2023 9:21 pm

Quoting is hard.

pfrankinstein · **#4065** by **pfrankinstein** » Jan 23, 2023 10:07 pm

Greg the Grouper wrote:Quoting is hard.

I have a single process theory. The process of primordial evolution by means of primal selection. Bang to the emergence of life.

How shall I portray/express that branching form, root, bush, tree.

Paul.

pfrankinstein · **#4066** by **pfrankinstein** » Jan 23, 2023 11:44 pm

Greg the Grouper wrote:Quoting is hard.

My mind wonders. My apologies.

Evolution my definition makes more sense than the experts.

:cheers:

Paul.

BWE · **#4067** by **BWE** » Jan 24, 2023 8:15 am

TopCat wrote:Why are people engaging with this thread? Genuine question. How can anyone at all not have hundreds of things better to do than waste their time on this?

I drop in occasionally to see if Paul ever becomes more coherent, more interested in actual discourse, but every time I'm disappointed.

Honestly, why?

It has a decent ten minute window of curiosity

pfrankinstein · **#4068** by **pfrankinstein** » Jan 28, 2023 7:45 pm

Cambridge Digital Library

Darwin began on page 5, but quickly crossed through the short passage he had written. He turned over the page and replaced it with a new page 5. However, that new start occasioned a historic change and crystallisation of Darwin's scientific language. For, in the first paragraph on p. 5, he used the circumlocution "means of selection," which he then extended to the fairly long phrase "natural" means of selection. But on the new page 5, he began a new section with a new heading, and as far as is known, it was at this moment that Darwin coined a new scientific term: "natural selection."

....

A monumental moment would be to say something intelligent about "all" species and have it make sense for all species alive today, including those from the past, dinosaurs, and those critters yet to be discovered.

NS is used as a common denominator, a device to explain all biological life and speciation.

Think of all that data, exemplified and explained by the notion of NS.

...............

A broad concept NS. None broader in explanetary terms. NS relates to life.

..............

The vast inorganic universe cannot be exemplified by a common denominator expression.

By means of "Primal selection" is fiction. So yes, I am deluded.

I'm deluded because I understand that nature was making selection before NS. Evidence all sround you.

Paul.

pfrankinstein · **#4069** by **pfrankinstein** » Jan 28, 2023 8:17 pm

fluttermoth wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:

Yes, your posts are tediously ignorant and you are tediously arrogant.

Probably the truest sentence written on the internet today.

It's hard to believe Paul's been waffling on like this for so many years, it's rather tragic, he could have gone and got a couple of degrees in something in that time

This bloke on the internet reakons that evolution is a process and it all started with the BB.

A flight of fancy fluttermoth.

Paul.

pfrankinstein · **#4070** by **pfrankinstein** » Jan 28, 2023 8:58 pm

The elephant in the room sir.

NS as a metaphor instead of a calculation made by Nature?

How shall I Mark you Thrower?

Process yes. Calculation made by nature?

Paul.

romansh · **#4071** by **romansh** » Jan 28, 2023 10:08 pm

Elephant in the room ... whether snowflakes replicate or not?

THWOTH · **#4072** by **THWOTH** » Jan 29, 2023 12:07 am

pfrankinstein wrote:Cambridge Digital Library

Darwin began on page 5, but quickly crossed through the short passage he had written. He turned over the page and replaced it with a new page 5. However, that new start occasioned a historic change and crystallisation of Darwin's scientific language. For, in the first paragraph on p. 5, he used the circumlocution "means of selection," which he then extended to the fairly long phrase "natural" means of selection. But on the new page 5, he began a new section with a new heading, and as far as is known, it was at this moment that Darwin coined a new scientific term: "natural selection."

....

A monumental moment would be to say something intelligent about "all" species and have it make sense for all species alive today, including those from the past, dinosaurs, and those critters yet to be discovered.

I don't think Darwin is a member of this forum, so trolling him isn't going to work. Just thought I'd point that out.

TopCat · **#4073** by **TopCat** » Jan 30, 2023 2:35 pm

BWE wrote:
TopCat wrote:Why are people engaging with this thread? Genuine question. How can anyone at all not have hundreds of things better to do than waste their time on this?

I drop in occasionally to see if Paul ever becomes more coherent, more interested in actual discourse, but every time I'm disappointed.

Honestly, why?

It has a decent ten minute window of curiosity

I had that when I first went back to the first page, but it dropped to a two minute window after that, and it's usually less than that now.

I could do a much better job of trolling, just by channelling my (much!!) younger fundie self. At least I could write in actual sentences.

BWE · **#4074** by **BWE** » Jan 30, 2023 4:24 pm

Yeah. I should have said it had because it eventually reaches resolution for most people.

pfrankinstein · **#4075** by **pfrankinstein** » Jan 30, 2023 5:54 pm

BWE wrote:Yeah. I should have said it had because it eventually reaches resolution for most people.

Natural selection, Primal selection, which is most easily proven to be a real actual phenominon,?

By reason , I'd have it that protoplanary discs exhibit the mechansm of "evolution.

A snapshot simulation clearly shows "descent" as in "down through time, modification by interaction, the resulting altered state rememberd and stored in the material itself. ; and then the next interaction; and so on "stratigrophy and solar systems.

The idea of " Primal selection" sir. A whimsy?

That is you do make the link between stratigraphy, the Earths core and the rings of Jupiter.?

Paul.

THWOTH · **#4076** by **THWOTH** » Jan 30, 2023 8:46 pm

Don't think there's a lot of sedimentary rock around Jupiter.

Primal selection == Teleology. Prove me wrong Paul.

pfrankinstein · **#4077** by **pfrankinstein** » Jan 30, 2023 9:25 pm

THWOTH wrote:Don't think there's a lot of sedimentary rock around Jupiter.

Primal selection == Teleology. Prove me wrong Paul.

Primal selection is what physics takes many calculations to explain and what nature expresses and answers in real life.

Paul.

THWOTH · **#4078** by **THWOTH** » Jan 30, 2023 10:20 pm

pfrankinstein wrote:
THWOTH wrote:Don't think there's a lot of sedimentary rock around Jupiter.

Primal selection == Teleology. Prove me wrong Paul.

Primal selection is what physics takes many calculations to explain and what nature expresses and answers in real life.

Paul.

OK. That's a proposition, so support it. In the meantime prove that Primal Selection is not Teleology.

Cito di Pense · **#4079** by **Cito di Pense** » Jan 31, 2023 6:10 am

THWOTH wrote:
pfrankinstein wrote:
THWOTH wrote:Don't think there's a lot of sedimentary rock around Jupiter.

Primal selection == Teleology. Prove me wrong Paul.

Primal selection is what physics takes many calculations to explain and what nature expresses and answers in real life.

Paul.

OK. That's a proposition, so support it. In the meantime prove that Primal Selection is not Teleology.

First you should ask Paul to describe the difference between Primal Selection and teleology. That would require him to show he understands what teleology entails. He will fall at the first hurdle, because his account of teleology will be one of primal selection.

BWE · **#4080** by **BWE** » Jan 31, 2023 3:11 pm

pfrankinstein wrote:
BWE wrote:Yeah. I should have said it had because it eventually reaches resolution for most people.

Natural selection, Primal selection, which is most easily proven to be a real actual phenominon,?

Neither. They are models to explain what we see.

By reason , I'd have it that protoplanary discs exhibit the mechansm of "evolution.

A snapshot simulation clearly shows "descent" as in "down through time, modification by interaction, the resulting altered state rememberd and stored in the material itself. ; and then the next interaction; and so on "stratigrophy and solar systems.

The idea of " Primal selection" sir. A whimsy?

That is you do make the link between stratigraphy, the Earths core and the rings of Jupiter.?

Paul.

One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Re: One bang one process.

Who is online