Evolutionary Theory Explains Diversity

Actually, you came here to tell us how good Interrelation Theory is.Is Interrelation Theory rubbish without contrasting it to ToE? You've used the first 500 words to tell us that you have a theory and that peer review mags won't publish it because they're unable to pull themselves away from their ToE dogma. I could have explained the ToE in less words with a degree of accuracy that would allow for testable predictions: i.e., no rabbits in the Cambrian.If your "theory" has any value it needs it independently of how much rubbish the ToE may be. If it's any good ToE will fall on it's own.I've read your site. You don't have a theory: you have a word. You keep repeating the word as if it has some kind of meaning. last summer I was given the great honor of being one-of-anyone-who'd-pay-some-minor-attention of studying the blue prints of a genuine, working UFO. This guy had spent untold hours weeks drawing this thing up in every, prosaic detail. He'd labeled the grommets used where wire passed through bulkheads. And right smack dab in the middle was a circular room marked "Primary Magneto-Reniatory Units" These were, I was told, the motors that made it go. End details.Oh yeah! You have icon's too. Why didn't Darwin use icons rather then arguments? He'd have been in like Flynn with the Catholics. This is a science board. You need to argue your position not sell it.As to your definitions: Seems to me you have this "common interrelated originator (CIO)" that needs defining much more the "time". I'm guessing most folks here would figure out "time" on their own.And then there are your mechanisms: "BIOTIC PRESERVATION MECHANISM (BPM)". Things don't die on purpose. You had to study that; hun? I mean, it's your prime mechanism. It really needs to have a bit more lan vital if it's not to just sort of a D'ah statement.Okay! I just have to admire your experiments. They are more telling of your mind set than all the rest of your missive. I present them here because I'd hate it if people with something interesting to do were to miss them. I don't think you'll find a single person to argue with your conclusion that this is not evolution by natural selection.Edited by lyx2no, : Submitted rather than previewed again.

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.

ToE states that randomly generated variations in an organism's genetic make-up are past along to it's offspring with a greater likelihood if those variations increase the likelihood of that organism having offspring. That's kind of hard to argue with.Given enough cycles of variation/selection and the biological natural history of the Earth is pretty much explained. This is backed up with giga-pantloads of evidence.Any theory that intends to replace it will have to say something about how modifications are passed along to future generations. Your theory fails to do that. At it's best it says that organisms will react to their environment. Lineage Continuation Mechanism (LCM) states little more then monkey see monkey do. By smacking one monkey a population of monkeys can learn to flinch when they see a stick. Agreed. How do monkeys learn to have red hair?Advantageous Properties Mechanism or APM is a form of selection. However, unlike ToE your monkeys, having derived it from the CIO*, inherently have all the possible variables available to them that are merely sorted out by behavior. This isn't a new idea. I've read it in these very pages quite often. But again, how do monkeys learn to have red hair?

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.

In effect, your theory predicts your theory. It's kind of cute in a Hello Kitty sort of way. I especially enjoy that animals, if they have to to save their own live, will deal with each other and the environment.By the way, I realize I may be, probably am, unfairly using your shortcoming in the language against you, but it's funny.AbE: Though, I do want to assure you that I will not judge your theory based on anything other then its own merits.Edited by lyx2no, : x

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.

From the age of five I've tried French, German, Dutch, Spanish and Russian. I have no ear: I failed at them all as quickly as is humanly possible. Though, I can say about three words from each. As it is I struggle to achieve idiosyncratic English. About the only slang I use automatically is "cool".By the way; welcome aboard.

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.

You mistake a motive for a mechanism. Your rat has a motive for squeezing through an impossibly tiny hole, but that doesn't supply a "how" unless rat wishes come true. Now, the rat's stress may cause it to suffer an increased, nervous metabolism, loss of appetite, and weight reduction. There you have a mechanism: anxiety.Nonetheless, this is not the point at which one reaches a grand conclusion; aka, THEORY. One says to themselves, "Self, Is there a possible connection with this rat's predicable behavior to cellulose impactor events (CIE)'s (Just trying to make my post all sciency like yours) and the long term variation in rat populations? What might that connection be and how could that connection be made observable?" If one manages to concoct a mechanism, one makes predictions of unique, observable, sufficient and necessary outcomes to which one can tailor experiments that can make plain the connection. Not wishing to die is a wee bit too ubiquitous to be considered unique, sufficient or necessary. Congrat's, professional dude, you achieved observable.You also keep making the strange argument that proponents of the ToE don't know, don't care, or don't concur about rat responses to (CIE)'s I think it's safe to say we all respond negatively to (CIE)'s and therein recognize the impetus for the rat to seek lodgings elsewhere.You also have to rid yourself of the silly notion of the more mechanisms the better. Newton reduced planetary motions to a single mechanism. Anyone want to add a Revolution Preservation Mechanism (RPM). {I can hear the conservation of angular momentum crowd even now. Well, shut-up.}{ And before any of you don't shut-up, I know that orbital deflection is not a conserved property but continually induced by gravity. So my little joke doesn't really work if given any consideration, So I'll not make it in stand-up; well, boo-hoo.}Ever hear of the Law of Parsimony: Occam's razor. My own corollary states one event has one mechanism. ToE has two parts; thus, two mechanisms. Part one: Variation. Part two: Selection. Mechanism one: Imperfect Replication. Mechanism two: Limited Resources. Sufficient and necessary. You have no new ideas at your website. You've named a few ideas that have been floating around. Your COI, or whatever, is the same as the Noah's ark boy's "kinds" claim. Your "time" thingy is merely a claim to having "discovered" a mechanism to limit the evolution you're forced to admit. Watch this:"Hey look guys, an 8^th continent."Okay, who believed me? 'cause I didn't really discover an 8^th continent. I was only pretending. Try it for yourself Oh yeah! That's right. You already did.Edited by lyx2no, : No reason given.

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.

Depending on how you mean this it is either close enough, misleading or wrong. But it nowhere is correct. Selection sorts out mutations between advantageous and disadvantageous. It does not cause them. Changes are random events that happen every time a genome replicates itself.BPM is an effect, not a cause. It is a one of the methods of increasingly efficient replication that genomes have blindly stumbled upon while replicating themselves. A genome is stupid. It replicates itself because that's what genomes do. They don't know. They don't care. They can't. Chemistry is the driving force, not life. Life is what we call that chemistry which successfully reproduces itself. BPM is an attempt give that chemistry (life) deeper meaning. If genome replication has no meaning to genomes there's no need to consider one in the ToE.LCM is also an effect of genomes falling into increasingly efficient methods of replicating themselves. They don't have the capacity to foresee, understand, or plan these methods. Genomes that stumble upon a more efficient method of replication increase their numbers at the expense of those that do not. The stumbling is called mutation, the replication at the expense of others is called selection.APM is a hodgepodge of nonsense. Part of it is a reiteration of LCM. Part of it is MSM. There might be a kernel of independent idea in there but a gnat just few up my nose so I'll be sorting that out leaving you to sort out an independent APM.Your MSM does not deal with time. It is artifice forced upon you to satisfy your insistence that organisms don't evolve beyond their "type". That organisms do evolve beyond their "type" removes the need for it. You can say the ToE is imaginary. But you can pull your boat up it, disembark and build a house on it.

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.

Worse, he had his message stricken by admin only 12 days ago.*Dr. Adequate's original ” and I must add "adorable" ” message. {So, you think inserting this extraneous blather is a good thing? Including quoting what was "hidden" in that other message? You like linking to admin disiplanery actions elsewhere? Remember this one? I suggest you monitor and tighten up your own posting quality. - Adminnemooseus}Edited by lyx2no, : Fix MID. Change subtitle.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : The red stuff.

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.