 | | Cultures, words, meanings and ownership (was Was Re: "piffle!" (bowdlerised for your protection)
|
|
John's right, this IS debate fodder. He should have set XFUT, but I will. XFUT o-t.debate and let's keep it out of other groups if it veers into the subject areas... that would be my strong preference and I suspect many others as well. Just a (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.technic.bionicle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) I thought this was an interesting perspective: From the OU ==+== Infant mortality is a thing of the past, major diseases are treatable and natural disasters largely avoidable, so the merciless selective forces of nature are something of an (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Larry a Creationist? 8^) Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Ack. I mean the surfacing of traits already in the population (and not newly mutation generated) when I said micro... and the longterm generation/selection of new traits (and speciation) when I said macro. Sorry if that was imprecise. I ain't (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Is Larry a Creationist? 8^) Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Ciprox in particular, but antibiotics in general are overused. But my understanding is that "macroevolution" is a straw-man term coined, or at least embraced, by Creationists. All evolution is microevolution except on the geologic scale, and (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Not a bad point, but it must be stipulated that since humanity is *part* of nature, then the traits we, as agents of nature, elect to favor will survive and be passed on in a manner exactly consistent with evolution. I'm not sure that the (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Doing the Discover Mag Rag (Was: At last, a Federal program we can all support.)
|
|
(...) Well, if you're only looking to maintain the status quo of scientific integrity, Weekly World News isn't too much of a leap away from Discover! I don't follow many science journals too regularly, though I'll pick up an occasional Scientific (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Macroevolution, yes. Microevolution, no. (which is why switching away from Ciprox is a good idea, hold it in reserve if we can) (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) "Dead end" has an air of finality that can't be declared with any confidence when speaking of evolution. It may be the case, though I don't think so, that we've created a temporary stall on evolution, but even then, it's not world-wide, and (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) to (...) Have you read the novels "Last and First Men" and "Starmaker" by Olaf Stapledon? They deal with exactly those issues but on a grand scale, and are *exceptionally* humbling reads. Highly recommended! Jennifer (24 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Doing the Discover Mag Rag (Was: At last, a Federal program we can all support.)
|
|
(...) We get New Scientist, it tends to be a bit "current" but it is a good read. The range of articles in it means one can spend and afternoon with it, or just a cup of coffee. It does not have the depth of Scientific American, but the detail is (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
