RE: Callouses and Kings

From: Vincent Campbell (v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk)
Date: Fri Aug 17 2001 - 10:50:14 BST

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: Logic"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id KAA12359 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:57:39 +0100
    Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101746013@inchna.stir.ac.uk>
    From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk>
    To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: RE: Callouses and Kings
    Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:50:14 +0100
    X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
    Content-Type: text/plain
    X-Filter-Info: UoS MailScan 0.1 [D 1]
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    >> Callouses would not evolve all of a piece, but gradually;

            <I can almost believe that with calluses, but the gradual emergence
    of
    > complex structures like eyes is highly problematic. Most of what goes
    > into
    > an eye has no use unless the whole structure is present.>
    >
            Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. Go back and read that chapter
    from 'The Blind Watchmaker' that you cited a while back, and read the
    explanation of how eyes can evolve gradually.

    >> but what
    >> you're REALLY missing here is dermatological understanding.
    >> Animals (including us) can develop callouses anywhere there is
    >> chafing on the skin; it's built into the dermis; the only
    modification
    >> needed is one that permits such growth in the absence of
    >> stimulation, and that mutation could happen anywhere, and only
    >> stick where it was useful and selected for.

            <You're simply restating the problem. If the mutation is random and
    could
    > affect any part of the skin, why does it affect precisely the area where
    > it's needed? And why not another mutation in that spot instead?>
    >
            Because of selection. Those whose tenednecy for callouses better
    fit the environmental demands that the organism is living in, persist more
    than those that do not, which is why I'd put good money on Joe being
    absolutely right about sex workers not getting callouses on their sexual
    organs as they might make sex painful, too difficult, or make them less
    desirable to potential mates. These would all limit the chances of people
    with calloused genitalia- in comparison to other forms of callous.

            <Mammalian evolution developed from primitive lemur-like stock very
    rapidly
    > after the fall of the dinosaurs. Within a few million years all the basic
    > forms were in place, from bats to whales.>
    >
            It is a continual process, and there are multitudes of species that
    evolved soon after the dinosaurs that are no longer with us, some only
    having disappeared pretty close to, or after, the emergence of modern man
    (e.g. smilodons- sabre-toothed tigers, wooly mammoths, rhino sized guinea
    pigs etc. etc.). The forms of all mammals were not fixed 60 million years.

            <To reject the Blind Designer is not necessarily to accept the
    Master
    > Designer. I reject all concepts of an independent design, whether
    > theological or chromosomal.>
    >
            What do you mean by independent design? If you mean not subject to
    motivated intent from some external source or other, I don't see any basis
    for rejecting that.

            Vincent

    -- 
    The University of Stirling is a university established in Scotland by
    charter at Stirling, FK9 4LA.  Privileged/Confidential Information may
    be contained in this message.  If you are not the addressee indicated
    in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such
    person), you may not disclose, copy or deliver this message to anyone
    and any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is
    prohibited and may be unlawful.  In such case, you should destroy this
    message and kindly notify the sender by reply email.  Please advise
    immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email
    for messages of this kind.  Opinions, conclusions and other
    information in this message that do not relate to the official
    business of the University of Stirling shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
    

    =============================================================== This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 17 2001 - 11:02:04 BST