home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.origins
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!uvaarpa!cv3.cv.nrao.edu!cv3.cv.nrao.edu!bgarwood
- From: bgarwood@sngldsh.cv.nrao.edu (Bob Garwood)
- Subject: Re: Next?
- In-Reply-To: m23364@mwunix's message of Wed, 23 Dec 1992 13: 59:56 GMT
- Message-ID: <BGARWOOD.92Dec23125644@sngldsh.cv.nrao.edu>
- Sender: news@nrao.edu
- Organization: nrao
- References: <1992Dec17.133858.6071@linus.mitre.org> <1658@tdat.teradata.COM>
- <1992Dec23.135956.23238@linus.mitre.org>
- Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 17:56:44 GMT
- Lines: 29
-
- "JM" == James Meritt <m23364@mwunix> writes:
- JM> In article <1658@tdat.teradata.COM> swf@tools3teradata.com (Stan Friesen) writes:
- JM> }In article <1992Dec17.133858.6071@linus.mitre.org>, m23364@mwunix (James Meritt) writes:
- JM> }|>
- JM> }|> What is next?
- JM> }|>
- JM> }|> talk.origins: On the evolutionary side, homo sapiens is seen as merely the most recent
- JM> }|> step in a series of rungs in a ladder. What do you see as the "next rung"?
- JM> }
- JM> }There is no next rung because there *are* *no* *rungs*.
- JM> }Evolution is *not*, I repeat *not* a ladder, it is a mucking great *bush*.
- JM> }
- JM> }Humans are not even the most recent species to evolve. There are several new
- JM> }species that have evolved in historical times.
-
- JM> That's nice. Unfortunately for your "*" speel, I specified one branch in
- JM> particular...
-
- Unfortunately for you, ladders don't have branches. Which is why
- a bush is a more useful simile (metaphore?) than a ladder and which
- is clearly where the confusion came from.
-
- Can we move on now?
-
- Bob Garwood
-
- I won't be reading any news until Jan 6th
-
- --
-