[lbo-talk] Re: Instinct

[Rotating Bitch]

At 02:23 AM 12/2/2005, Arash wrote:
>Arash wrote:
> >
> > Care to surmise or cite the specific argument Gould makes against this
> > point?
> >
>
>Carrol Cox wrote:
>
> >It's a long and complex book. It is also a book that anyone who wants to
> >propound on evolution should read or shut up. If you aren't a biologist,
>
>I was asking for a simple summation or citation of Gould's refutation about
>this very basic premise concerning reproductive fitness.  I'd think the onus
>of shutting up would rest with those who evasively point to a long, complex,
>book in absence of offering a substantial counter-argument to the specific
>issue at hand.

Well, it's not -- the onus. You don't see very many people disagreeing with 
miles, do you? Maybe that's because he's done a pretty good job of 
summarizing Gould for you already. OVer and over again, he's repeated it. 
So, I think it's time: get thee to a library. Or google it.

Then we have C. bodi repeatedly using the word gender in a way only he 
does. Yoshie explained to him how gender has come to be used: 
simplistically, to indicate man and woman, not male/female.

I don't know Miles, you sure have a lot more patience than I do. 
Personally, I don't like wall head. But then, I have hair. :)

Bitch | Lab
http://blog.pulpculture.org