On Dec 28, 2007 3:08 PM, Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nick, if you can remember where you read that, there's someone at my
work who might be very grateful.
It was in the New Yorker -- a Malcolm Gladwell article about profiling:
On 30/12/2007, at 3:33 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
On Dec 28, 2007 3:08 PM, Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nick, if you can remember where you read that, there's someone at my
work who might be very grateful.
It was in the New Yorker -- a Malcolm Gladwell article about
profiling:
Charlie Bell wrote:
Yes, and if some disaster were to befall every dog breed except
Great Danes and Chihuahuas, that would be a speciation event. :-)
Your point is valid, and shows how tricky defining species can be -
there are whole groups of beetles of which the member species can
On 28/12/2007, at 9:08 PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
OTOH, Pitbulls should be called a different species; they are
dogs in the same way that killer whales are whales :-/
That they've been bred for viciousness says more about the people
doing the breeding than the dogs themselves. As for
Charlie Bell wrote:
OTOH, Pitbulls should be called a different species; they are
dogs in the same way that killer whales are whales :-/
That they've been bred for viciousness says more about the people
doing the breeding than the dogs themselves.
Yes - but they corrupt the good name of
On 28/12/2007, at 11:00 PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
I used orcas just because of their (wrong) name, killer whales,
since they are more dolphins than whales.
I didn't mean, what's wrong with the name killer whale. I meant,
what's wrong with killer whales? Why do orcas give whales (or
Charlie Bell wrote:
I used orcas just because of their (wrong) name, killer whales,
since they are more dolphins than whales.
I didn't mean, what's wrong with the name killer whale.
It's wrong, because they are not whales. Ok, a seahorse is
not a horse, a sea anemona is not a flower, but
On 29/12/2007, at 12:04 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
I used orcas just because of their (wrong) name, killer whales,
since they are more dolphins than whales.
I didn't mean, what's wrong with the name killer whale.
It's wrong, because they are not whales.
Yes they
Charlie Bell wrote:
It's wrong, because they are not whales.
Yes they are. They're toothed whales. Baleen whales (humpbacks,
blues, rights, minkes etc) and toothed whales (including killer
whales, pilot whales, belugas, narwhals, and dolphins) are a clade,
they're monophyletic. They
On Fri, 28 Dec 2007, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
It's wrong, because they are not whales.
Yes they are. They're toothed whales. Baleen whales (humpbacks,
blues, rights, minkes etc) and toothed whales (including killer
whales, pilot whales, belugas, narwhals, and
On Dec 28, 2007 3:31 AM, Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That they've been bred for viciousness says more about the people
doing the breeding than the dogs themselves. As for orcas, what's
wrong with orcas? They're carnivores, they're top predators, they're
smart. But they're no better
Charlie, thanks for the essay and the links; good stuff.
Doug
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On 29/12/2007, at 3:02 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
I relaxed a great deal about pits after reading an article citing
statistics
that made it clear that *owners* are far more responsible for their
dogs'
behavior than I had imagined before becoming a dog owner
Nick, if you can remember where
On 29/12/2007, at 9:46 AM, Doug wrote:
Charlie, thanks for the essay and the links; good stuff.
*takes a bow* My pleasure. It should be obvious it's one of my
favourite topics (well, I did sit through 4 years of it at
university...), and I'm always happy to talk zoology or evolutionary
Nick Arnett said,
I have a hard time believing that pits are inherently vicious.
They aren't when you are a friend of the little old lady that owns
one. (I knew the `little old lady' when she was young, but then, I
was young at the same time ...)
... *owners* are far more responsible
Nick wrote
I relaxed a great deal about pits after reading an article citing
statistics
that made it clear that *owners* are far more responsible for their
dogs'
behavior than I had imagined before becoming a dog owner
Nick, if you can remember where you read that, there's someone
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/19/education/19texas.html?_r=1ref=usoref=slogin
HOUSTON — A Texas higher education panel has recommended allowing a
Bible-based group called the Institute for Creation Research to offer
online master's degrees in science education.
The action comes weeks after
On Dec 27, 2007 7:08 AM, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Misleading headline and misleading subject to this thread... the Institute
remains unaccredited. At an unaccredited school, anybody can teach
anything. There's no green light here for issuing a *real* Masters
degree. One
On 28/12/2007, at 2:52 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
Where the difference is, we provide both sides of the story, Mr.
Morris said.
That's the thinking that really stinks, in my opinion. Polarizing
issues is
a great way to get attention, gain power and make money. It's no
way to get
to
On Dec 27, 2007 5:37 PM, Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
4) Over enough generations, different selection pressures applied to
different parts of a population (or even just drift, if the geographic
range is significantly larger than the geographic range of family
groups), causes enough
Hola!
I've reordered Nick's reply slightly, 'cause I want to deal with this
bit first -
On 28/12/2007, at 1:23 PM, Nick Arnett wrote:
I hope nobody here has imagined that I disagree for a moment with the
historical reality of evolution.
Nope! I was just laying it out again, 'cause Henry
On 28/12/2007, at 1:23 PM, Nick Arnett wrote:
Except... that a species often isn't clearly delineated.
Arse, I meant to mention this in my other reply.
http://scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts/2007/01/species.php
John Wilkins has a nice piece on species concepts here.
Charlie.
22 matches
Mail list logo
