|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Biological evolution is irrelevant to humans.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] natural selection leaves only the most fit. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ]I haven't said that natural selection leaves only the most fit. [/ QUOTE ] WTF? Maybe you should get your story straight before talking to others. [ QUOTE ] I don't know if there is a rigorous way to establish a relevant time scale for an evolution. The charachterisic time of new species formation seems to be a good choice. [/ QUOTE ] No, it's an absurdly bad choice when you are talking about evolutionary pressures within the human population, as you did. Did anyone claim these pressures would lead to the creation of a new human species first, and only then have an effect? This looks like a waste of time. I will ignore you henceforth. [/ QUOTE ] Well, you are right about the first point, I didn't formulate it correctly. (Thought that I did it right, when I responded.) It should be something along the lines: ' elimination of the less fit, larger than average represantion of the most fit (meaning that they leave more offsprings) with a large degree of chance (as the most fit could have been accidentally killed)' As for your second point, it is totally uncalled for. I suggested one measure of time. You are just stating that it is bad, without trying to provide another one. (Do you know about the notion of a charachteristic time scale as used in physics?) As for ignoring it looks really strange to me. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|