Jump to content

rohirwine

WFG Retired
  • Posts

    2.853
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by rohirwine

  1. @King Tut: you put down in better english than mine what i was trying to say :D:ph34r:

    @All: in general, we should not be influenced too much from classification: this is useful to distinguish different species, but it contains the danger of seeing them as an immutable thing. Obviously it's not so: evolution and selection goes on as we are talking, the problem is that we're not able to register it at every "step" ("grade", "increment", call it whatever you want).

    Randomly reminding from my comparate anathomy course: our knowledge of the past is based on series of findings, not on the whole spectrum. This means that we have a tiny amount of material out of the total exsisted, with great holes in the figure. It's obviously easy to get the difference from an Ape and a Lemurid, the problem is that sometimes there is no use (or could be even dangerous) to try to point out differences in a manic rash for detail (i'm thinking of the various "scientific" theories over the existance of races: read Stephen Jay Gould's The mismeasurement of man for a good study on the issue; the "scientific" study: The Bell Curve from Herrenstein and Murray is a good example of venomous politically lead "research")...

    :D

    Matteo

  2. Just wanted to add to Klaasy's post (always precise as usual), some Historians and Archeologists believe that the mith of Atlantis was related not only to Minoan civilization, but also to the collapsing of the Volcano island of Santorini, wich seems to have hosted a Minoan-like "civilization" (or "state", if you prefer) before a major eruption made the volcano roof to collapse and go underwater. This cataclysm (sp?) must have been truly disastrous and it's consequences must have been seen far away from the island. Hence it is quite reasonable that some trace should have remained in the mithical corpus of ancient Greece, thus strengthening the mith of Atlantis.

    :ph34r:

    Matteo

    P.S. Don't ask me more precise quotes, since i do not have them on hand: just diggin into my Greek History course memories...

  3. Look, apart the joke above, it is not correct to talk about "chicken" and "egg", because they depict a fixed situation, wether, IRL, there is no chicken identical to another, and no egg exactly the same to another.

    And even if two chickens (generally speaking) are similar but different, this means that they can still interbreed. Hence, when a different carachteristic arises, it gradually spreads among a given population, till it becomes unsubstituable (sp?). Hence even the "egg feature" must have appeared in such a way (a part that it was present in reptilians and was brought on to birds well before the chicken even dreamed about it's mainstream future in Chicken tikka, or Chicken curry dishes :D ).

    A part this: scientists always argue over given issues, this is the only way to do some progress in science.

    :ph34r:

×
×
  • Create New...