 | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | (...) I think I was mixing the way that I was using the phrase "in the interest of." Obviously organisms don't know what's in their species' "best interest" in terms of adaptability. I'd revise my statement above to be something like: It is probably (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | (...) I understood that, I have probably been influenced/corrupted by Richard Dawkins... (...) perhaps. I guess that would fall under artificial selection. I think we may be bordering on eugenics here, which has its own set of problems. (...) true, (...) (25 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | (...) for further worries... (URL) (25 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Fish :-( (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) feeding (...) caught, has advocates, and will be slow to ruin the whole of the lake. I guess we'll wait and see. Chris (25 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) I don't know. That explanation seems plausible especially given how SEAsian river fish behave given the option of a current. You have to be a pretty hard-core cichlidiot to keep track of all the different P.zebra strains. But I raised (...) (25 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
