Peer Review Conspiracy

The rip or rub in MY, BSM, example NOT appearing is that it is simply a matter of conceiving (as per tolerance and allowance for any transient to permanent fit) CO-adaptation as a POSSIBLY two genetically orginal sources rather than ONE POPULATION aspect in the landscape that Bruce Wallace TAUGHT at CORNELL in the 60s. Will Provine's ONLY question to Phil Johnson was for him to explain adaptations (ON THE INDIVIDUAL LEVEL (WILL MADE THE SLUR TO THE SPECIES AS AN ASIDE))WITHOUT common Decent. I believe this can and will be DONE. Eldgridge however TOOK this slight slur to mean that it would not be OK to have the debate but you see as long as we keep "debating" it and talkin for walkin sake we wont have solved those pieces that ARE doable despite the parental influence. So-NO-just becuase there are none or so if none appear it does not mean that academia is true as to the false fact involved for it STILL is at the level of a generations education not the medias consumption of the same. I could have answered WILL but why I am answering you instead? Will seems to have substituted Darwin's anti-seperate creation with coadaptation where it would be physically possible in effect to invert the relation of tolerance and allowance in a shifting fit population(number) of species (to say so avoiding wrongly the whole group selectionissue).

This bevy of beavers seems to hold if not conciously at least within reason to some idea like Russel's that otherwise is peculiar where advances (way back in 1900) made "obsolete" or some such wording Kant's distinction of LOGIC and MATH. Most of evouls here are too sophisticated to let words wend wrongly.

Speculative Reason is NOT the reason that practical reason is not pure among evo scientists playing the Philosopher's metaphyics.

what part of /p/u/r/E did you not purchase or puurrrrrr?

Construction of BirthPlace Cardinality- or- why and how the English sentence fails to use the English word "engineering" properly for for their to be an engineering result their must be the invention that the result produced- and as any organism might decieve another there is no a priori reason (short of a philosophy against the a priori for isntance) that niche(Hutchinson) construction can even aposteriori reconstruct Stebbins OPEN HABITAT. read and weeeeeeeep or dont read I dont really care if the dynamics can not make the cut to the sublime. I did and I was no ant.This should be publishable even though it wends around the issue of the "image" of GOD which G.Galdshev does not support in the choice but still finds GOD in the NATURAL LAWS he used and uses to find any split between inorganic and organic temporal hierarchies.1)appropritate the genetic marker "rule" into any seperation of inorganic and organic hierachies.
2)Show the cause and effect of dominance and recessivness can result from disruptive selection (either way) of extremes to the central by some combination of ecology and behavior in neophenogenesis remakring that Carter's understanding of Deme is inaccruate in this respect.
3)Using catastrophe theory calculate the relative "marker: motion of the inorganic hierarchy between an arithemetic organic hierarchy dividing Agassiz's physical agent per some group selection no matter the shifting balance
4)AND POINT F must be reaced and DONE!!,:: Associate the metric of the inorganic hierachy and subdiploid populations etx of supramolecular VOLUMES to a Kirchoff model of perversions where the temporal crosxsxxpoint among all the heritable hierarchies occurs (somewhat poorly diagrammed 000___
**********************************000 which ordinates teh birthplace coordination across kinds/phyla.The biology has been a fraud so far in education.