Rather than keeping on trying to explain this, if you're interested,
take a look at Wikipedia's page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_sexual_reproduction
It explains the problem, and various attempted solutions, including
the one Terren mentions below, and others I've mentioned.
Neverth
That was my understanding too, Terren.
Brent
On 11/5/2015 6:52 PM, Terren Suydam wrote:
The reason sex evolved seems so obvious to me that upon hearing that
there is no consensus, I fear I must be missing something.
Asexual reproduction leads to organisms that can only adapt to
changing en
The reason sex evolved seems so obvious to me that upon hearing that there
is no consensus, I fear I must be missing something.
Asexual reproduction leads to organisms that can only adapt to changing
environments as quickly as random mutation allows. And environments change
much more quickly than
On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 8:48:49 PM UTC+11, telmo_menezes wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Pierz >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, November 2, 2015 at 5:27:04 AM UTC+11, telmo_menezes wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 3:14 AM, Pierz wrote:
>>>
On S
The study demonstrate that the P3b signal may well not be a neural
correlate of consciousness, but doesn't contradict my understanding of
the global workspace theory (that consciousness is a means for global
coordination of the brain).
It just shows that unconscious processing may involve global
s
On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 09:46:20AM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> evolution of life. I think we do have evidence that with sex, the
> evolution of species has been accelerated.
>
I don't think that is true, but even if it were, it doesn't explain
why sex accelerates the evolution of species. If an
On 6 November 2015 at 06:21, John Clark wrote:
>
> I don't confuse a damn thing. Neither a "universal dovetailer" nor
> anything else can write *ONLY* correct programs (or *ONLY* correct
> anything) without the use of matter that obeys the laws of physics.
>
But those programs which are consci
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 4:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> >
> it is true independently of me verify it or not. That is why I can say
> that I am sure that Goldbach conjecture is true or not, that Riemann
> hypothesis is true or not. I accept the excluded middle
>
I agree, but that doesn't gua
On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Pierz wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, November 2, 2015 at 5:27:04 AM UTC+11, telmo_menezes wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 3:14 AM, Pierz wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 11:20:32 PM UTC+11, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Sat, O
On 04 Nov 2015, at 18:35, John Clark wrote:
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Bruno Marchal
wrote:
>> If sentence X says "2+2=5" then sentence X expresses a
numerical relationship, that association may or may not belong to
the category "true" but it's certainly a relationship. The pr
On 04 Nov 2015, at 19:41, John Clark wrote:
On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 2:45 AM, Bruno Marchal
wrote:
>> We know from Gleason's theorem that in 3 spatial
dimensions only the square of Schrodinger's wave (the Born rule),
and not the cube or anything else, can yield a probability without
On 04 Nov 2015, at 23:00, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 11/4/2015 1:16 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 03 Nov 2015, at 18:30, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 11/3/2015 1:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Well, in machine's theology, the proof of the immortality of the
soul by Socrates is valid, but is not cons
On 04 Nov 2015, at 22:38, John Mikes wrote:
About the biological makeup of reproducing Brent Maker wrote:
> >Biological theory says that sexual reproduction should halve the
> >fitness of the organism as compared with asexual (or
parthenogenetic)
> >reproduction, so asexual reproduction shoul
13 matches
Mail list logo