But it *COULD* be EVIdence driven. While doing my due dilligence to Georgi's snail mail (in an attempt to deTERMine %any% physical parameters of Gladyshev's MATERIAL THERMOSTAT) I reviewed LPWILLIAMS' (who by the by gave me an &F& in an independent study I attempted with him on QED, Goethe, Newton and Snake Integument)on Faraday where (during this period of my grading anthoer relevant article on the interaction of the American Henry with F(&Wheatstone&Danellei) came out in a book Williams was still trying to write on Ampere (think Mercury and perversions then..))Williams HISTORICALLY (and spoke speaking for and in history)left the WORD "apriori" between two commas uncategorically and finally dismissing Voltanism for his own (NOT FARADAYS (nor Teslas I, BSM, add) UNDERSTANDING of the relation of chemistry and electricity but this DID NOT remand that Aggaisz's GOD OF PHYSICAL AGENTS (whether the actual agnostic agents in the Semantic Info of Niche constructors or not)probablistic independence of biological events in terms of possibilities of populations IF ECOSYSTEM ENGINEERING ****IS NOT***** thought of in non invention terms by creatures which on further reflective consideration of any mind open to Kantian notions STILL can be ONLY MATERIAL ( no matter the actual track width). Faraday for instance was thinking of volume changes of gas independent (by "conversion of" in Williams-speak) of difference IN THE POWER bEtWeEn diamagentic and paramagnetic atom complexes of today. In this same "session" I readily "imagined" that the "BRANCH" of Aggasiz might be within the power of Tesla&Faraday to reason such that herpetology as it is could spell out the THOMPSON DEVICE of thermal effect organically. Further Galton use of the Gauss error would on the science be correctable to the Mendelism in any kind of hierarchical thermodynamics with the only reasonable question as to if the grounding be in an Earthly trend as ISOALTED biogeographically so (with the water not the population understood) or if further discussion relevant to defintions of information itself be proceeded.
This analytic (which I dont doubt could be cobbled from Kant's reason) was possible by thought of the mass of water considered in YEC on the basis of the historian use of the word "apriori" and does not decide on the motivation or inclination in religion but is not in any way plausibly against the personal worship of any of the individuals involved.
Aggisz' "logic" is very tight between the branch, grade and type that those not suseptible to his form will only rather find Tyndal in the past noting only a change in the FORM OF SCIETIFIC DISCUSSION without recognizing the the thing is today but the error of yesterday.
Words must mean what they really mean and not deconstruction can even take this away from the responsible reader. I read Dawkins' last book and am surprised that I could finally rid my mind of his notions once and for all. For within the above understanding from a protracted c/e discussion lies a complete conceptual agreement with GOULD instead but instead of saying this I will continue to work on the history of thermoelectricity for therein seems to HAVE BEEN the first attempt TO BUILD what any one can know today as the Gladyshev THERMOSTAT. It would not be irrelevant in the popular mind of the 1800s that to take a piece of metal and clean it and put in back inthe metal (mercury etc) brings biologic change via water macrothermodyanics ecosystem engineered finally into the web and out of the elite understood appearence once and for all. Long life the freedom to think. Let I B Cohen be put on notice.
™ Version 4.2
