Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,832 Year: 4,089/9,624 Month: 960/974 Week: 287/286 Day: 8/40 Hour: 0/4


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Biological Evolution ⇒

The Origin of Novelty

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Origin of Novelty
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2322 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008

Normal Thread Display

(2)
Message 334 of 871 (691358)
02-22-2013 8:46 AM 		Reply to: Message 305 by Bolder-dash
02-22-2013 2:23 AM

Re: A calls out Taq for being wrong.
Bolder-dash writes:
​
Oh, I misunderstood you did I? Ok, so you completely disagree with Taq, and feel that he has no idea what he is talking about when he suggests that dwarfism is a gain in function.
No. He's saying that both he and Taq never said it was a gain in function. They both say it is a novel feature. The two are not the same.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 305 by Bolder-dash, posted 02-22-2013 2:23 AM Bolder-dash has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 336 by Bolder-dash, posted 02-22-2013 9:14 AM Huntard has replied
 Message 337 by Bolder-dash, posted 02-22-2013 9:15 AM Huntard has not replied
  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2322 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008

Normal Thread Display
Message 339 of 871 (691367)
02-22-2013 9:26 AM 		Reply to: Message 336 by Bolder-dash
02-22-2013 9:14 AM

Re: A calls out Taq for being wrong.
Bolder-dash writes:
​
No Huntard, he didn't call it a novel feature, he called it a "novel function" I know you are from the Netherlands, are you stoned?
I'm sorry, yes he did call it function instead of feature. A function can be a feature however. And no, I don't do drugs (yes Oni, I'm a pussy ).
​
The two are not the same. A novel feature is not a novel function.
But a novel function can be a novel feature.
​
But I would argue its not even a novel feature. Having bones that don't grow is not novel, anymore than having one less arm is a novel feature or function.
It is if the function/feature wasn't present before, which it wasn't.
​
If that were the case, then every aspect of the body would be called a novel feature, like for instance if your parents arms were 24 inches long, and your were 26, you might call that a novel feature. And you would be wrong again of course.
Why? Although limb length probably falls within a normal set of variation. But what about bone growth. Why is the absence of bone growth not a novel function/feature if it wasn't present before?
​
I know you hate it when your side is losing so bad, but trying to *** to save them face just makes all of you look ******.
I'm not trying to save their face. I was trying to give an outside perspective, in that I apparently read a different meaning in their words than you did. I thought that pointing this out would be helpful, and so, I responded. If you'd rather have me not trying to help anymore, I'll gladly stop posting at your request.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 336 by Bolder-dash, posted 02-22-2013 9:14 AM Bolder-dash has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 341 by Bolder-dash, posted 02-22-2013 9:43 AM Huntard has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024