My problem with evolution

As far as I know it is the other way around. At least until someone can tell authortiatively that one can compute around any "black" particle Newton defined in the Opticks and then it would not be clear what created what. Seems like with Democritus and the current atomism it is MIND (Anaxagors) that created matter (nuclear bomb) but if a Chinese poster knows otherwise, well, let me, western electric, etc know.

Is genetic variability discontinuous fundamentally or only any appearing so etc becuase we only *know* it emprically in your mind?

On you r notion of physics... how do you know that "electricity" in the nerves is not only needed to set up a geometry that quantum thinking has repudiated as to visualization? And that we confused rather the "image" with the "thought of the image" (Hume's "idea of idea"??). I spent some considerable time trying to think if Tesla's light bulb "filament" does not transipriationally if not think produce melatin distribution in living organisms. It is true that the "thought" of a snake is no hamster but to philosohize as a bat? well why not??? I dont think the computer analogy need hold up all the way to the notion of the minds that created quantum stuff. They just tried very quickly to use the older innersight of space and time IN THE PHYSICS but when thinking of genes this is still needed despite Wheeler, Bohr, Bohm etc. Fredkin etc etc.

Kaufmann was motivated by random blinking lights in terms of genes and chemistry. I never was. I would prefer to sit with Kant's judgement asthetically.