Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation
From: Ferrous Patella (mail125797_at_pop.net)
Date: 09/13/04
- Next message: Gregory L. Hansen: "Re: Is Lorentz contraction objectively real?"
- Previous message: George Hammond: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- In reply to: John Wilkins: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Next in thread: John Wilkins: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Reply: John Wilkins: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 15:25:49 +0000 (UTC)
news:1gjz1nk.1hhc4da1ep8fntN%johnSPAM@wilkins.id.au by
johnSPAM@wilkins.id.au (John Wilkins):
> ErikW <bryophyta@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ferrous Patella <mail125797@pop.net> wrote...
>> > news:UMidnesglpC6taTcRVn-vA@comcast.com by "George Hammond"
>> > <research137@hotmail.com>:
>> >
>> > > We all know homosexuality is counterproductive, biologically.
>> >
>> > No. "We" do not know that.
>> >
>> > There are many examples in biology where nonreproductinve members
>> > of a population are a benifit to the species as a whole.
>>
>> Ehum, group selection...
>
> Of the untenable kind. Sorry FePa [ErikW], but benefit to an entire
> species is unworkable unless it is a small deme of close kin.
Actually, I was thinking of social insects.
>>
>> >
>> > You premise is false. The rest does not follow.
>>
>> Agree.
>
> Also. Smaller group selection, AKA kin selection, can account for
> homosexuality just fine, even without invoking conditional strategies.
-- Ferrous Patella (Homo gerardii) "If the universe is so finely tuned, how come I can't sing worth a darn?" -Cheezits
- Next message: Gregory L. Hansen: "Re: Is Lorentz contraction objectively real?"
- Previous message: George Hammond: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- In reply to: John Wilkins: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Next in thread: John Wilkins: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Reply: John Wilkins: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|