[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jonathan:
[B]Since the TOE relies on the use of multiple mutations to account for the gradual progressive changes made in an organism, please explain how this process works.
[/QUOTE]
[/B]De Vries BEFORE using standard "Mendelian" practice uttered *not* dominance and recessive but active and latent which to my "philosophy" tends to have me think that for the $time$ being discused IN THE EXPERIMENT (F1-F2--and beyond)(not Nature but the Science would lend a narrative at least towards such by inference if not already induced etc)Mendel was inscripting his experimental philosophy by FORM whereas De Vries doing the same science was doing it by SPACE. I was trying to express similary but within the TIME that physics has given science a nature of which (at least Wolfram believes this) where there is SOME reversing of space and time. Croizat takes the talk about to FORM-making & translation in Space as a topic in the subjective taxonomist view at least.
By trying to generalize the ADDITION that De Vries attempted to do with Mendel's work that Mayr seems not to have been able to outthink (maybe because he was stuck on the "gut" of Haeckel which seems to dissaper in the "phylogeny" of Echinoderms if one recoginzes that cucumbers have blood vessels among the 5-fold syymetery that others in the group do not ...)to a 3:1 ratio history reading and writing etc I hit on (by trying to come up with a standard NATURAL SELECTION in Wolfram's deviant position with regard to some taxoGENIC optimization (whehter by directed mutations as per this thread or Grehan's notion of Croizat's "orthogeneis" for instance (AIG thinks this is a "symptom" and Grehan's Taxocom postings more in favor than others of US cretationism as afflicted by the same evolutionary community as panbiogeographers like homosexuality ... may come out this as well AS TO BECAUSE cause etc. and thus IS ALSO IN GENESIS... BIBLE.)))in particular with some of this thought from Stephen Wolfram [A x (non-universality approaching group theory)Aa x a] of Mendel's indpendence of A/a from a/A in A + A/a +a is due to sperm and pollen being small(not because these are males! on chromosome part of heritbility) not being able to express a principia zoologica equal to principia botanica thus finding a commonality that started some vicatiance biogeography and panbiogeography ON LARGE TIME SCALES. I only attempt to USE the same insight but not predict the TIME until AFTER I have sorted out the FORMS of the offspring that already "sprung" from De'Vries'' mutations which WILL matter if they are directed or not.
[QUOTE][B]
I hear it referred to constantly and its process is never questioned or explained.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
Simply denials of creationsim in this case are not able to mustard the custurd or to put the peanut butter and jelly together. What is called for is co-operation of both sides not use of insitutions to assert who ever has the least chemicals added to their bodies wins. This should not sound like a "drug" economics. But it does. Probably becasue people are afraid to think these thoughts for being prematurely (innocently) accused of sexism when it is geographic distributions that were seen
How are the traits inherited?I am not saying that "directed" mutations isnt as per above to start to try to talk equally to all...(one simply can taketalk a standard position with regard to orthogenisis. I certainly do not know know absloutely either way PER orthoselections which would be in my opninion the material database category to look for or have placed the "evidence" (data collection mechnism with values) in....
The interesting thing to note is that Just by attending to the words in the discourse one may gain some insight.
quote:
Is the DNA changed at birth or after?
i DONT KNOW
™ Version 4.2