Hi guys and gals. I don’t have my ping list handy, so could you be so kind as to ping this to the appropriate FReepers. Thanks a bunch—GGG
This list? Stentor; Marty; Fractal Trader; metmom; John Valentine; editor-surveyor; Mr Ramsbotham; Chode
I’m quite sure the UCLA researchers didn’t use their findings to dispute evolution.
Only those who can’t understand would do so. . .
Read later. I’ll wait for the other shoe to drop.
I suspect that on close examination, this conjecture will be shown to be false as well.
Ping!
More anti-science nonsense, eh? You sure seem to specialize thusly.
I would rather not see FreeRepublic turned into a Creationist forum. There are probably better places for these posts.
Actually I think that this information much more supports the theory made by Rupert Sheldrake in his book “A New Science of Life” (The Hypothesis of Morphic Resonance).
“The theory consists of an addition to the chemical and physical properties of materialism, something in addition to the DNA code in random mutations and non-random natural selection, an additional force what many vitialists have always acknowledged; the idea of higher organizational states. And here it is the theory of morphogenetic fields and formative causation. The idea of morphogenetic fields first developed by embryologists such as Conrad Waddington and later mathematically by theoreticians such as Rene Thomas. “
You are posting some great article sir. If you’re an evo you have to believe that nature “knows”, or “knew” that there would be motion in order to develop these crystal formations far into the future. And what happened to those poor creatures that never had this? Did they all fall down or travel in haphazard manner until one of them “evolved” these things for balance?
ping