Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: The Digital Mage <mn3rge@****.ac.uk>
Subject: Which came first?
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 13:50:34 +0100 (BST)
On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, GRANITE wrote:

> Close enough..
>
> > But which came first?)
>
> The egg came first..But the critter that laid it wasn't quite a chicken
> yet..So when this critters' embrio in the egg mutated some [the favorable
> kind] it became a chicken..This first chicken or rooster mated with those who
> spawned it the chicken or roosters' genitic traits were stronger than its
> predecessors and thus spawned only chickens and roosters..eventually
> displacing its ancestors..But what does this have to do with anything????

Exactly my take on it, from way back, after all an egg is a genric
description while chicken is a pretty defined description.

Anyway, not SR related so thats all I'll say.

The Digital Mage : mn3rge@****.ac.uk
"Life is a choice, Death....an obligation."-Me
Shadowrun WWW site at http://www.bath.ac.uk/~mn3rge/Shadowrun
Message no. 2
From: RAY MACEY <r.macey@*******.QUT.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Which came first?
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 11:40:03 +1000
On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, The Digital Mage wrote:

> > The egg came first..But the critter that laid it wasn't quite a chicken
> > yet..So when this critters' embrio in the egg mutated some [the favorable
> > kind] it became a chicken..This first chicken or rooster mated with those who
> > spawned it the chicken or roosters' genitic traits were stronger than its
> > predecessors and thus spawned only chickens and roosters..eventually
> > displacing its ancestors..But what does this have to do with anything????
>
> Exactly my take on it, from way back, after all an egg is a genric
> description while chicken is a pretty defined description.

You mean to say that there are other people out there that have come to
this conclusion. Yeah!!!! I'm not alone.


Ray.

_______________________________________________________________________
| 'The Universe is a big place, and whatever happens, you will not be |
| missed.' |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EMAIL: n1565842@*******.qut.edu.au or
r.macey@*******.qut.edu.au
Message no. 3
From: GRANITE <granite@**.NET>
Subject: Re: Which came first?
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 02:23:29 -0700
The Digital Mage wrote:
> Exactly my take on it, from way back, after all an egg is a genric
> description while chicken is a pretty defined description.
>
> Anyway, not SR related so thats all I'll say.


Chicken!
--
-------------------------------GRANITE
=================================================================
Lord, Grant Me The Serinity To Accept The Things I Cannot Change,
The Courage To Change The Things I Can,
And The Wisdom To Hide The Bodies Of Those People I Had To Kill
Because They Pissed Me Off.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ShadowRunner's Serinity Prayer
Message no. 4
From: John Pederson <Canthros@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Which came first?
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 21:09:38 -0400
In a message dated 96-10-14 16:44:06 EDT, you write:

>On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, The Digital Mage wrote:
>
>> > The egg came first..But the critter that laid it wasn't quite a chicken
>> > yet..So when this critters' embrio in the egg mutated some [the
favorable
>> > kind] it became a chicken..This first chicken or rooster mated with
those
>who
>> > spawned it the chicken or roosters' genitic traits were stronger than
its
>> > predecessors and thus spawned only chickens and roosters..eventually
>> > displacing its ancestors..But what does this have to do with
anything????
>>
>> Exactly my take on it, from way back, after all an egg is a genric
>> description while chicken is a pretty defined description.
>
>You mean to say that there are other people out there that have come to
>this conclusion. Yeah!!!! I'm not alone.
>
>
> Ray.
I suppose as a Christian, I tend to be biased, but I find that explanation to
be a little ridiculous (it's oversimplified at the least). The other problem
is that there really isn't any proof for this approach. I really hope I'm
not offending anyone, but as I understand it, this process would require
transitional forms-none of which have yet been found. You'll probably point
to Archaeopteryx as the transitional form in this case, which would be
plausible, except that another, older, and more birdlike fossil was found
recently. Before you point to this new fossil as your transitional form, why
should you consider this to be a transitional form if the last one wasn't?
If history follows form, then another will probably be found that is older
still. If you point out "punctuated equilibrium"-aka "The Hopeful Monster
Theory"-, the belief that evolution occurred in short, but explosive, bursts,
let me remind you that it (in another oversimplified statement*) basically
says that a reptile laid an egg and a bird was hatched-no transitional forms,
no need for that piece of support from the fossil record. Hope that I
haven't offended anyone greatly, but I do hope I've made you think-either of
reasons that I'm wrong (which I don't believe I am) or of reasons why I might
be right...scary thought, huh? Anyway, had to rant, now it's over.

*I don't know much about the Hopeful Monster Theory besides what I've stated,
but I do know that Darwin stated that without the afore-mentioned
transitional forms, the theory of evolution would have no support, no proof.
To this day, there is _no_ evidence for evolution between species, only
evolution within a species.

John Pederson
canthros@***.com
http://members.gnn.com/lenoj/johns.htm

PS-feel free to thwap me if you can come up with a good reason why I'm wrong
(that's probably inviting trouble, but...) and OTOH, feel free to add support
for me if you feel the same way I do.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Which came first?, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!