NPR Science Friday Sept. 8 2006

Okay, I went ahead and started a team.
It is TeamEvC, and anyone who wants to can join at Join TeamEvC create better climate modelsfrom there, click on the join link, and it should work. I can't test it myself, given that I'm the founder and already in the team.it's not conservation, but it's help nonetheless.

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

Hi kuresu,Thanks for starting the team - just downloaded and installed the software (surprisingly easy for a linux machine!). The project looks very interesting... How did you come across it?

chatting with jarunlike the aids project, this one is long, and not glamorous.
thanks for joining the team.

---

A new TeamEvC. join up at Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions.

I do not want to muddy the waters as the participants in this thread seemed to have resolved themselves some differences but I will weigh in here before proceeding to more direct content.If by “crisis”

quote:

---

There is no biodiversity crisis just as there is no round Earth crisis.

---

you had meant the shape of Darwin’s Spanish Eggshell- Gould flashed across an evolutionist’s ("collective")consiousness,then yes, no compromise is sufficiently possible crossing Gould’s modern tech bullet points for Darwin (numbers “1”and “6”) Then yes indeed there can be no “compromise” but this does not mean that EvC need cease and desist discussing the 6th orderED “bullet point.”I say this confidently because evolutionists' biogeography of the 30s( the time frame that historically positions Gould’s plausibility) in so far as it was necessary to biodiversity, is questionable most certainly as yielding notes like the following (from my grandfather) “On several occasions in the past I have begun a journal only to lapse after a few months. During this last year I have appreciated the need of such notes after searching hours for various scraps of paper bearing data that I needed and frequently not finding them.

​

I feel rather apologetic about starting a journal now because my time in the field is so limited this year with my special Saturday morning class and . ” “Miss Stein has several glasses on approval. She asked me to try out three of them over the week end. I had planned to go out to the woods this morning but it was drizzling rain and I did not want to get the glasses spotted. About ten oclock we all went out to North slough. After studying birds and comparing glasses . ”I promise to come, writing, through the bullet points such that if not “common” ground, common water, is possible. I will work out if this is common land or common form (so "groundable")in the question about turtle senses or elsethreadwhere.Upthread, fallacycop said,

quote:

---

creos seem to believe that all life on earth was created for human beings to do with them whatever they see fit (It says something about that in the bible).

---

but as I will try to separate downstream adaptation may trump diversification as in Gould’s assessment such that what a creationist may have in dominion is actually a part of ONLY Darwin’s move from points 1 and 2 and (if) because of this it would be wrong to only slam creos "sedimenting" @ point "three" of Darwin by Gould, the finger that moves etc, and thus some commonality WILL be willable should we have the good will to do so.I opened this thread to see if there could be LESS ONLINE interest and more instutional rest. If EVC has to move futher into cyberspace for this to happen than this will be a good thing as well but one that must "return" out of its own sense of "virtual" time. This will be hard to judge. I am not sure, how, we will witness this.

quote:

---

All thumbnails from Gould's "Structure of Evolutionary Theory" except the two from the pen of Willard Stanley, my Grandfather ornithologist.

---

Well what I was looking for was some kind of social commonality that could comphrehend at least a general evolutionary thought vs knee jerk special creationism.Gould has written his last chapter in

quote:

---

Admitting his annoyance that Wilson got to the term first, Gould argues that consilience (a word originated by the philosopher of science William Whewell in 1840) more correctly applies to his own theory than Wilson's. Amazon

---

as a refutation of Wilson’s consilient chain and yet Gould cites Maynard Smith WITHIN AN ISOLATABLE GROUP OF POPULATION GENETICISTS (in "The Structure of Evolutionary Theory")as feeling ”left out’ of the “punctuated equilibrium” script all the while denying the charge that trended to Marxism going outside the British Museum beyond Stanley’s mid-70s PNAS article on "species-selection" that rather, in Gould’s hierarchy, corrected an earlier scientific enthusiasm. Creationists also outside this grouping by Gould (natural kinds) felt that PE had moved INTO its own domain and yet I must record that the only “scientific” information that I received on this “change” from the 70s to the 90s was from a Marxist and my own ideas that WERE NOT Creationist or Religious were being rejected despite the “information” ultimately coming form a source of American Evolutionism directly attached to Morgan-Mendelism (or possibly within Maynard Smith’s “population genetics”).If contrary to my own evidence and personal experience there is “NO” Marxist influence on how the braching topology of grades clades in WHILE NOT OUT (you see Gould insists that popular and creationist misreading stem from failed "dictomies" but it is unclear to me that Marx's reference to divison of labor and chemistry survives if Boole's rules include trichotomies (without necessity but possibly suffiency of natural kinds(Kripke)), then it seems that some kind of common ground should be possible from Wilson’s direction but should the only groundable “ought” result from Gould’s Argentinian ant exemplar kin wise I would be more than a little uneasy bcause Gould too easily attaches “real” politics to creationism and that I do not find on EVC much touching the issues of biodiversity even though we discuss the full gamut that is still missing no matter what the fossils say or record.No matter what, we do need to be NOT "silent" no matter how many cups of water get spilled towards the least mobile of society. The spin-off from this thread is *some* evidence regardless. Gould has descripted ecosystem chemical throughput as bounding his use of Darwins' Malthus and I think this opens up all kinds of new issues that can bring one closer to whereon Niles Eldridge
Amazon.comhttp://www.randysbooks.com/envthought/9780520208452.html
general thought that "dominion" will be the commonest "feeling" accessible here, where Gould also "felt" something important about what Nile's contributed, no matter how the economics of drug/chemcial industry is bottom-lined anthropologically. We would have to read this as more than "one" ecosystem. Niche construction as a neglected process in evolution provides the ends to this means but I feel I have not done the psychology of this future any benefit accruable to conservation biology as of yet.