Click here to support the Daily Grail for as little as $US1 per month on Patreon

News Briefs 13-02-2007

There’s probably more news out there somewhere, but I’m off to watch Star Trek instead.

Thanks a bunch to Greg.

Quote of the Day:

Whoever’s producing CBS News doesn’t seem to grasp that ‘the blogs’ are not some undifferentiated goo to spread on stories for spice. The salient features of the blogosphere are its diversity and depth. Perhaps that explains why it’s so alien to nightly news producers. Where the nightly news puts a homogenizing sheen on every 2 minute clip, blogs and blog posts vary wildly in length, tone, erudition, evidentiary support, and uses of the term ‘wanker.’

David Roberts, in CBS News and the blogosphere.

    1. quote source
      Hi absds,

      We must have been searching for the source at exactly the same time, because apparently I was editing to give credit to Roberts at the same time you were writing your comment. Nice syncronicity, huh?

      Thanks for having my back on this one.

      Kat

  1. Darwinian dogma
    I fully agree with Jeffrey Schwartz’s contention that evolution of species does not result from constant changes but happens in sudden changes.

    Hope he does not get a creationist label now.

    1. gradualists and catastrophists
      What I don’t understand is why there would not be both of these effects.

      There can be small changes, which are insignificant on a global scale. If you want, you can say they were catastrophic on a very small scale. Let’s say for a single species in a small lake.

      Similarly, a crime victim may have more than one cause of death. Take Rasputin, who was poisoned and drowned and shot, or something like that.

      —-
      You probably would not worry about what people think of you, if you could know how seldom they do (Olin Miller)

      1. Of course
        The ability to adapt must not be taken out of the equation.

        The difference I make though is that adaptation is not evolution but progress within a branch of the tree of life.

        What I mean is that if by adaptation a specie develops certain abilities, resistances, etc. to survive in its environment, it has not ‘evolved’ but has specialized.

        That’s the way I look at it anyway.

        Both of the above though would preclude ‘chance mutations’.

        Following the lines of entropy, chance mutations could only lead to chaos, certainly not improve, mutate the whole organism or specialize in line with the environment.

        There is no intelligence in randomness. Of course, as rational empiric entity we may assign to randomness whatever lies beyond our understanding like we did before assigning everything to a single god-entity.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mobile menu - fractal