Re: Misunderstood Cichlids

From: Dace (
Date: Sun Sep 02 2001 - 22:23:20 BST

  • Next message: Lawrence DeBivort: "RE: Dawkins etc"

    Received: by id XAA22055 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:42:41 +0100
    Message-ID: <002d01c133f5$7e7e6020$d387b2d1@teddace>
    From: "Dace" <>
    To: <>
    References: <>
    Subject: Re: Misunderstood Cichlids
    Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001 14:23:20 -0700
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
    Precedence: bulk


    > Since isolation is related to speciation, we may have a slight problem. A
    > population may become physically isolated from another of the same species
    > by a geographical barrier, but as MR theory claims there is spooky action
    > a distance. This action at a distance, if it can influence crystal growth
    > and rodent learning in locales far removed, shouldn't have much problem
    > jumping across a wimpy little geographical barrier. Wouldn't resonance and
    > formative causation run counter to geographical isolation?

    While isolation prompts speciation, resonance encourages parallel
    development among the new species.


    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)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 03 2001 - 00:03:09 BST