|
|
Post by Einhorn on Apr 29, 2023 8:41:59 GMT
What does that have to do with the OP? 4 posts in a row = triggered? I could have made it one post. But that would have required quite a bit of messing about. It's simpler and faster to just quote each point in a separate post. Is using a more efficient method equivalent to being triggered? You do seem rather desperate to score points, Ned. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 8:43:51 GMT
4 posts in a row = triggered? I could have made it one post. But that would have required quite a bit of messing about. It's simpler and faster to just quote each point in a separate post. Is using a more efficient method equivalent to being triggered? You do seem rather desperate to score points, Ned. Fair enough. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Apr 29, 2023 8:53:31 GMT
I put the post in quotation marks to show that I was quoting. As your above post demonstrates, it is an easy matter to find the source. It’s not unreasonable to ask that a link be posted as evidence with a post and it does help support a posters point. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Apr 29, 2023 9:02:56 GMT
I put the post in quotation marks to show that I was quoting. As your above post demonstrates, it is an easy matter to find the source. It’s not unreasonable to ask that a link be posted as evidence with a post and it does help support a posters point. I indicated that it was quotation with quotation marks. As Ned demonstrated, it is an easy matter for those interested in the source to find it. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Apr 29, 2023 9:33:35 GMT
It’s not unreasonable to ask that a link be posted as evidence with a post and it does help support a posters point. I indicated that it was quotation with quotation marks. As Ned demonstrated, it is an easy matter for those interested in the source to find it. And much easier and more courteous for the poster to cite that link in the first place which also but not always strengthens their argument. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Apr 29, 2023 9:40:26 GMT
I indicated that it was quotation with quotation marks. As Ned demonstrated, it is an easy matter for those interested in the source to find it. And much easier and more courteous for the poster to cite that link in the first place which also but not always strengthens their argument. Ned made several points in his post. I attempted to address them. I was told that I was 'triggered' for my efforts. We're not always courteous to each other. Why focus on my supposed discourtesy? Do you have an axe to grind? |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Apr 29, 2023 10:35:58 GMT
Yes, it's not evolution. Nevertheless, the effect is similar, even more dramatic, than evolution. Caterpillars undergo a fundamental change without dying. Is there a reason why evolutionary change requires death as opposed to, say, metamorphosis? The best I can come up with is without death there’s no reason for evolution. without death there is no reason for reproduction and without reproduction there is no evolution. It's circular and redundant because without reproduction none if it happens anyway. If we find a form of life that lives forever and doesn't reproduce we have found a genuine mystery. It's interesting to mull over why organic life dies and how that situation arose through evolution. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Apr 29, 2023 11:00:17 GMT
The best I can come up with is without death there’s no reason for evolution. without death there is no reason for reproduction and without reproduction there is no evolution. It's circular and redundant because without reproduction none if it happens anyway. If we find a form of life that lives forever and doesn't reproduce we have found a genuine mystery. It's interesting to mull over why organic life dies and how that situation arose through evolution. There is no reason, death is part of evolution as evolution occurred because of death or more accurately a cessation of existence. The strategy for existence is not searched for and found it is arrived at by the life and death situation. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Apr 29, 2023 11:42:43 GMT
And much easier and more courteous for the poster to cite that link in the first place which also but not always strengthens their argument. Ned made several points in his post. I attempted to address them. I was told that I was 'triggered' for my efforts. We're not always courteous to each other. Why focus on my supposed discourtesy? Do you have an axe to grind? An axe to grind? No but I could Post several links to axes if you like. I know we’re not courteous to each other all the time but being so costs nothing does it?. The only point I was making is that adding a link enables others to understand where you are coming from and can sometimes strengthen your argument and as with the above posting the link costs nothing too but if you just want to say go look yourself that’s fine but don’t complain if you’re pulled later about it. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Apr 29, 2023 11:52:36 GMT
Ned made several points in his post. I attempted to address them. I was told that I was 'triggered' for my efforts. We're not always courteous to each other. Why focus on my supposed discourtesy? Do you have an axe to grind? An axe to grind? No but I could Post several links to axes if you like. I know we’re not courteous to each other all the time but being so costs nothing does it?. The only point I was making is that adding a link enables others to understand where you are coming from and can sometimes strengthen your argument and as with the above posting the link costs nothing too but if you just want to say go look yourself that’s fine but don’t complain if you’re pulled later about it. None of my counterpoints was addressed. All I got in response was remarks about links. Bear that in mind before your next dissertation on proper forum etiquette. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Apr 29, 2023 11:54:25 GMT
without death there is no reason for reproduction and without reproduction there is no evolution. It's circular and redundant because without reproduction none if it happens anyway. If we find a form of life that lives forever and doesn't reproduce we have found a genuine mystery. It's interesting to mull over why organic life dies and how that situation arose through evolution. There is no reason, death is part of evolution as evolution occurred because of death or more accurately a cessation of existence. The strategy for existence is not searched for and found it is arrived at by the life and death situation. Organisms come with a biological clock that effectively gives them a finite life - they get weaker and weaker over time. This ageing mechanism had imo to evolve. I don't think there is a intrinsic reason why biological organisms shouldn't just carry on living forever, but they don't because it is a severe evolutionary disadvantage - the niche gets crowded with older generations and there is limited ability to adapt. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Apr 29, 2023 11:59:48 GMT
An axe to grind? No but I could Post several links to axes if you like. I know we’re not courteous to each other all the time but being so costs nothing does it?. The only point I was making is that adding a link enables others to understand where you are coming from and can sometimes strengthen your argument and as with the above posting the link costs nothing too but if you just want to say go look yourself that’s fine but don’t complain if you’re pulled later about it. None of my counterpoints was addressed. All I got in response was remarks about links. Bear that in mind before your next dissertation on proper forum etiquette. No what you got was Ned saying fair enough and me just saying a link would help,a dissertation? No an observation anyway it’s straying from the topic which might mean the death of the thread  Which was interesting till you emulated a camel. As someone once said Death it’s so bloody final. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Apr 29, 2023 12:03:22 GMT
None of my counterpoints was addressed. All I got in response was remarks about links. Bear that in mind before your next dissertation on proper forum etiquette. No what you got was Ned saying fair enough and me just saying a link would help,a dissertation? No an observation anyway it’s straying from the topic which might mean the death of the thread Which was interesting till you emulated a camel. As someone once said Death it’s so bloody final. Yes, I noted that Ned remarked that my response was fair enough. I had no further issue with Ned after that. Neither of us had been especially courteous to each other prior to that, but you chose to make an issue of my supposed discourtesy. I thought you might have had a reason for being selective. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Apr 29, 2023 12:09:03 GMT
No what you got was Ned saying fair enough and me just saying a link would help,a dissertation? No an observation anyway it’s straying from the topic which might mean the death of the thread Which was interesting till you emulated a camel. As someone once said Death it’s so bloody final. Yes, I noted that Ned remarked that my response was fair enough. I had no further issue with Ned after that. Neither of us had been especially courteous to each other prior to that, but you chose to make an issue of my supposed discourtesy. I thought you might have had a reason for being selective. Without blowing smoke up your backside you post interesting stuff and like all of us sometimes you can bristle. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Apr 29, 2023 15:57:42 GMT
There is no reason, death is part of evolution as evolution occurred because of death or more accurately a cessation of existence. The strategy for existence is not searched for and found it is arrived at by the life and death situation. Organisms come with a biological clock that effectively gives them a finite life - they get weaker and weaker over time. This ageing mechanism had imo to evolve. I don't think there is a intrinsic reason why biological organisms shouldn't just carry on living forever, but they don't because it is a severe evolutionary disadvantage - the niche gets crowded with older generations and there is limited ability to adapt. It does seem to point to some advantage in that strategy. It seems as though fresh generations can survive where older generations were not adapted for the new conditions. Once DNA appeared though then longevity of genes was the key and all of us are but giant gene carriers and reproducers and designed to protect and recreate the genes which realistically do survive almost forever. |
|
