Why Is Only "Micro Evolution" Acceptable?

[David Sklansky]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Roger Penrose, and others, claim that human's unique ability to understand Godel's proof makes them way beyond animals. The barber paradox is a simpler version.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you find time to start another thread explaining how the barber 'paradox' is related to Godel's proof it would be interesting. The barber struck me as a problem of poorly formed premises rather than a paradox that grows out of solid ones. Likely I've been mishandling something.

thanks, luckyme

[/ QUOTE ]

This is another one of those Sklansky simplifications that mathmeticans might cringe at. Since I am only moderatrely familiar with Godel's proof I will let others elaborate.