🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 11:27:29 +0100, Mike Clark <mrc7@nospam.cam.ac.uk>
wrote:

>In message <p0fkd2hmap27ofjd4hq799mggguncc7f4p@4ax.com>
>          amacmil304@aol.com wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 12:41:39 +0100, Mike Clark <mrc7@nospam.cam.ac.uk>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> >In message <2fnhd21eas3jg4lc8tn2v2vk0lp659f5bb@4ax.com>
>> >          amacmil304@aol.com wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 19:37:00 +0100, Mike Clark <mrc7@nospam.cam.ac.uk>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> >In message <l9jhd21n8tfl47p5nhhc3fve4q8e92lvnk@4ax.com>
>> >> >          amacmil304@aol.com wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 13:02:24 +0100, Mike Clark <mrc7@nospam.cam.ac.uk>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> >In message <qitgd2tc1jssb28b5oig2bm4ldjnr2fcl1@4ax.com>
>> >> >> >          amacmil304@aol.com wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:48:36 +0100, Mike Clark <mrc7@nospam.cam.ac.uk>
>> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >In message <jfgfd2tkm9l57ebd83ie9bgcl1o4cvju77@4ax.com>
>> >> >> >> >          amacmil304@aol.com wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> So if everything is natural your whole argument falls to bits because
>> >> >> >> >> people take decisions that are completely different to each other so
>> >> >> >> >> you cannot claim that evolution is a pathway that affects all beings
>> >> >> >> >> from any species in the same way.
>> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >You obviously don't understand evolution or what I've written.
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> You obviously don't understand what you wrote yourself.  
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >However did you come to a conclusion that I would want to claim that
>> >> >> >> >"evolution is a pathway that affects all beings from any species in the
>> >> >> >> >same way"?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> Absolute nonsense.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Oh I see you came to wrong the conclusion because you were spouting
>> >> >> >absolute nonsense. Of course, that explains it.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> I see. All you can do is try to twist words around :-(
>> >> >> 
>> >> >
>> >> >No I asked a clear question and you made a statement that answered the
>> >> >question.
>> >> >
>> >> 
>> >> No I was referring to the question - and you know it.
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> > > Evolution can alter members of the same species in different ways.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Are you invoking a Lamarkian explanation?
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> I'm not invoking anything.  
>> >> >
>> >> >Your statement uses "evolution" as "altering" members of a species, and
>> >> >that sounds to me very much like a Lamarkian rather than a Darwinian
>> >> >interpretation.
>> >> >
>> >> 
>> >> I'm not invoking anything; I'm just saying what happens.
>> >> 
>> >
>> >But members of a species are not "altered" by evolution. 
>> 
>> Of course they are.
>
>Absolute nonsense.
>
>> Evolution can follow different pathways determined by separation and
>> result in different traits in a single species.
>> 
>
>The process is one of selection of individuals who already differ in
>traits. 
>
>> > That is a Lamarkian explanation and it does not describe the process
>> > properly. Giraffes didn't get longer necks because they stretched
>> > them more and this adaptation was then re-encoded in the germline.
>> > The counter explanation is the Darwinian explanation whereby there
>> > is diversity amongst individuals but selection only allows some
>> > individuals to survive and to breed.
>> >
>> 
>> See above.
>> 
>> 
>
>See above
>
>
>> > For evolution to happen it helps if only a selective proportion of
>> > individuals in a group survive. Disease, predation and competition
>> > are some of the selective pressures that contribute to evolution.
>> 
>> Evolution happens all the time  to all.
>> 
>
>Absolute nonsense.
>
>> > 
>> > Darwin realised that your domestic cat or dog looks the way it does
>> > because humans have selectively allowed some animals to survive and
>> > breed based on traits that humans found attractive (the others were
>> > killed or allowed to die without passing on their traits).
>> 
>> This is really boring stuff.  Where did you learn this?  Primary
>> school?
>> 
>
>I'm trying to find the lowest common denominator of understanding
>between us. It isn't made easy by your refusal to expand on, or explain,
>your particular use of words.  However it is an attitude I'm well used
>to from some petulant teenagers.
>
>> 
>> > 
>> > [snip]
>> >> >> > > 
>> >> >> > > Perhaps you could try a course at night school :-))
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Sorry I already am teaching on enough courses without offering to
>> >> >> > teach at night school as well.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> I might have known.  
>> >> >> 
>> >> >
>> >> >Yes especially if you'd paid attention to my sigs, email addresses
>> >> >and other statements in my postings. 
>> >> 
>> >> I don't bother with sigs. They can be faked.
>> >> 
>> >> Are you some sort of professor at Cambridge?
>> >> 
>> >Google is your friend. The clue is that I'm the Mike Clark who is also
>> >into mountain climbing, cycling, skiing, immunology, antibody
>> >engineering, and of course campaigning on various issues such as
>> >conservation, access etc.
>> 
>> So what?  Nothing better else to do?
>> 
>
>Such as?

A proper job where you don't have time to troll in working hours,
especially at the tax payers expense.

>Mike

A tosser.

> o/ \\    //        |\   ,_ o      Mike Clark
><\__,\\  //   __o   | \ /  /\,   "A mountain climbing, cycling, skiing,
> ">    ||   _`\<,_  |__\  \> |  immunology lecturer, antibody engineer and
>  `    ||  (_)/ (_) |   \corn computer user"

Not to mention small minded, small stature and small dick.


Lose the shit sig as well, before you make a target of yourself, and
get something other than your head, stuck up your arse.








%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       




Malcolm Ogilvie of Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk on the suggestion he
copied Konters book.


" You are making yourself look foolish. The book on Grebes by Andre 
Konter that was published in 2001 was entitled 'Grebes of OUR World'. 
My book, published only this month, is entitled 'Grebes of THE World', 
and as such is entirely different. The similarity of the front covers 
is quite coincidental. My book IS the first ever devoted to Grebes. 

Malcolm Ogilivie."

    ...............................................

KONTER (Andre) - Grebes of our World. Visiting all Species on Five 
Continents - 2001, 8vo. 187pp. Colour photographs, line drawings.  A 
description of the 22 species of grebes, their natural history, ecology 
and behaviour. 
>>

Grebes of the World 
Malcolm Ogilvie 
The book starts with an authoritative introduction on the origin, 
evolution, distribution, physiology and behaviour of grebes, followed by 
accounts of each of the 22 species 


>Malcolm it looks as though Konter might dispute that statement! 

>Rob

"Yes, indeed, what I said was wrong and I apologise to Andre Konter, 


Malcolm Ogilvie" 

    ................................................

>>>The error I made was in a chatty piece about the actual writing of the 
>>>book which I posted to a non-birdwatching newsgroup

>>>    M Ogilvie
>>
>>
>>You clearly and explicitly stated that yours was the first book on the 
>>subject, in the full knowledge that the topic had recently been 
>>covered very thoroughly in Konter's book. 
>>The facts speak for themselves. You are a liar who only had the grace 
>>to own up when you had been found out - you even persisted in giving 
>>the impression that you were the first to write it *after* I had drawn 
>>attention to your untruth. Your apology comes a little late. 
>>You do yourself no credit in introducing other, wholly irrelevant 
>>matters in order to deflect criticism from your behaviour. Shame on 
>>you. 
>>
>>Paul