Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-27-2019 7:17 AM
24 online now:
caffeine, Pressie (2 members, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 854,844 Year: 9,880/19,786 Month: 2,302/2,119 Week: 338/724 Day: 1/62 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   rational people only (no yecs)
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 3206 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001

Message 46 of 46 (22857)
11-15-2002 11:09 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by quicksink
03-08-2002 11:37 PM

I ususally have too much to say, so quick I would source my vain Faraday search in discussing this from a YEC position but seeing as I am going to and have writ some biology in position to Wolfram's fundamental particle universe I think the below is appropriate relative to BIG BANG only the biology theory comes from the other 1/2 eternity end as regards time and I would be using space to connect to the ideas this cosomology could form (mat) etc. So here is what I think that biology could be contributing via the physicality of inheritnace to a physics of the nanos..
Toward saving web generations Acts:1-2; JOEL
Mendel*should* (no)(sic!) have expected 1:2 ratios with a chi square p=.99993 but rUther ("farther", further, futher) some deviation/clinamen addition due to small number of seeds, chance chromosome events and yet what Mendel said, was; "The dominant character can have here a double signification vz. that of a parental character, or hybrid-character. In which of the two significations it appears in each seperate case can only be determined by the following generation." (The translation^* said "determined" not "obtained" and is thus in fidelity to any conception of induction Mendel may have possessed) that when generalizing the computation to maximal universality no matter the equivalent sophistication this signification is dissolved (by so-called Provine "continuous diffusive effects") and returned to a less plurivocal state whether by univocal terms fluid arising from electrotonic functions or not such that topologically but not topographically is the sign a denotation specifically connotable as well is. This is a case that Wright observed about latitude and longitude error differenences in his isolation by distance but Fisher who may have conflated in the sense Mayr attempted to inflate “evolution” and “development” (because they did not think constrictors eat electric fish?) as a consequence rather than a series cardinally failed to target in this cirticial attitude toward etc the lexos and only actually got the gramme. A theory of writing this is needed. A Cardinal distrubrance is not an inaccessible cardinal. And so Fisher criticized Mendel for only demonstrating and not “discovery” but again finding facts Fisher failed to by any translation in space assert the certs life saver grammer Doubly signified (Pascal was well versed in this kind of thought (to which Bill Clinton could have learned wherefrom ) and it does not seem “coincidence” that Olby thought Galton had a 3:1 (not compression please) Mendel ratio from Pascal’s triangle but failed to read its sematics. I do not read Chinese. It is still not certain if this is due to a technique (with error) of infinite componetability or farther some more futher fundamental infinite division unawares and yet this is a “discovery” in the application of transfinites to matter which many thought Impossible only still the bioegeography remains outside breached in amystic writing pad it is not.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by quicksink, posted 03-08-2002 11:37 PM quicksink has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019