On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote:
variants like Larmarkianism may well be possible.
There are a number of problems with Lamarckism, such as it never having
been observed to occur in the lab or in the wild, and it being completely
inconsistent with our
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
God doesn't necessarily want *us* to do anything. He wants [...]
God wants? He's omnipotent, why doesn't God have?
instead to work *through* us.
If for some obscure reason God want's something then He should get off
If not all acquired characteristics are beneficial and in fact the vast
majority of them are not
how is that functionally different from mutations.
Richard David Ruquist
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 10:37 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 Russell Standish
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
If not all acquired characteristics are beneficial and in fact the vast
majority of them are not
how is that functionally different from mutations.
It is NOT functionally different from mutation, that was precisely my
John, adding to the clatter? Who does what? Wants? What???
If somebody has sweet dreams, let him dream.
JM
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 11:00 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
God doesn't necessarily want *us* to do
John et al -- Not sure how demarcated the usage is here between the terms
Lamarckian Evolution and Epigenetics - some feel Epigenetics should only
refer to the actual molecular mechanisms (such as DNA methylation and
histone modification) that alter the underlying gene expression; I find this
6 matches
Mail list logo
