Was Darwin Wrong? - powered by motigo.com" />
|Page: < 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 >||
|23.12.2013 17:05, Brig Klyce :|
Gert, thanks for the link. It should actually be http://www.panspermia.org/what
because newer entries may push that one down and off the screen. Whatever. Merry Chirstmas!
|21.12.2013 19:16, Gert Korthof :|
Nice to hear from you.
And thanks for linking to my Koonin review!
I'll make a link back to your review.
Keep up the good work!
|21.12.2013 16:00, Brig Klyce :|
Dear Gert -- I have read and reviewed Koonin's book on my website at panspermia.org. Now I see your review and I have linked to it. I did not overlook the MWO thread! Hope all is well with you. Best regards, Brig
|07.12.2013 10:43, gert korthof :|
http://www.mmdnewswire.com/the -soma-by-robyn-lindley-11185.h tml
|07.12.2013 07:29, Yannis Gounaris from Univ. Thessaly, Greece :|
Dear Dr Korthof,
I am trying to invite professor Ted Steele to write a review on inheritance of aquired characteristics for a special issue of the Open Evolution Journal.
Do you by any chance have an e-mail address to contact him?
Prof. Molecular Biology
Univ. of Thessaly
|05.02.2013 21:21, gert korthof :|
hello Aaron Sloman,
thanks for visitign my site.
I am afraid that you are right, I am busy at the moment. Further,I am afraid you have more knowledge on some issues than myself.
Have a nice day,
|05.02.2013 00:32, Aaron Sloman from Birmingham University, UK :|
I have found your web site very useful while trying to develop ideas forming the Meta-morphogenesis project. Key idea: mechanisms of evolution, development, learning, cultural change, produce NEW mechanisms of evolution, development, learning, etc. So in this case morphogenesis leads to meta-morphogenesis.
Another key idea is that increasingly the biological information acquired, developed, used, is not about things going on inside the organism but about other things in the immediate or remote environment or past or future, or unobservable mechanisms (e.g. physics), or the information processing in other organisms (conspecifics -- including offspring as they learn --, prey, predators, etc.). There's a huge amount of work to be done documenting the transitions in information processing that make this possible, including the discovery of mathematical ideas leading up to Euclid, etc.
One of the questions I've been struggling with is what are the features of chemical information processing that allow all this to get off the ground and under what conditions can it happen? How much is chemical computation essential for functions attributed to brains?
I have various documents in progress on different aspects of these ideas, and if you ever have time to look I'll welcome feedback: as your viewpoint seems to be unusually well informed and broad minded, and I am sure your criticisms will be useful. I've tried to present an introductory overview in the form of PDF slides here: http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/resea rch/projects/cogaff/talks/#tal k107 (It includes some links to your web site, though I suspect you have a lot more relevant materiall than I have so far found.)
I'll quite understand if you are too busy.
|27.08.2012 20:02, Juan from Miami :|
I have review the site. Great job, excellent judgement, and criteria.
Let me introduce a concept broader than evolution: Infoability. Infoability as the capacity to create information. From infoability, we derive evolution as successful trends in living beings.
On the other hand, we can stay that matter and information equals life. Matter requires infoability to direct life, being evolution a byproduct of the synthesis --matter-information--
|17.08.2012 22:34, Dave :|
Love the site!
|16.08.2012 13:31, Dov Henis from Israel :|
Origin And Nature Of Earth Life, An Update…
tags: life genesis, natural selection, life mass format
Liberate your mind from concepts dictated by religious trade-union AAAS.
Life is just another mass format + re-comprehend natural selection + natural selection is ubiquitous.
Life Evolves by Naturally Selected Organic Matter
Homegrown Organic Matter Found on Mars, But No Life
http://news.sciencemag.org/sci encenow/2012/05/homegrown-orga nic-matter-found-o.html?ref=em
II. EarthLife Genesis From Aromaticity/H-Bonding
http://universe-life.com/2011/ 09/30/earthlife-genesis-from-a romaticityh-bonding/
September 30, 2011
Purines and pyrimidines are two of the building blocks of nucleic acids. Only two purines and three pyrimidines occur widely in nucleic acids.
Pyrimidine is a heterocyclic aromatic organic compound similar to benzene and pyridine, containing two nitrogen atoms at positions 1 and 3 of the six-member ring.
A purine is a heterocyclic aromatic organic compound, consisting of a pyrimidine ring fused to an imidazole ring. Purines, including substituted purines and their tautomers, are the most widely distributed kind of nitrogen-containing heterocycle in nature.
Aromaticity ( Kekule, Loschmidt, Thiele) is essential for the Krebs Cycle for energy production.
Natural selection is E (energy) temporarily constrained in an m (mass) format.
Natural selection is a universal ubiquitous trait of ALL mass spin formats, inanimate and animate.
Life began/evolved on Earth with the natural selection of inanimate RNA, then of some RNA nucleotides, then arriving at the ultimate mode of natural selection – self replication.
Aromaticity enables good constraining of energy and good propensity to hydrogen bonding. The address of Earth Life Genesis, of phasing from inanimate to animate natural selection, is Aromaticity.Hydrogen Bonding.
Dov Henis (comments from 22nd century)
http://universe-life.com/2012/ 02/03/universe-energy-mass-lif e-compilation/
|21.05.2012 07:21, gert korthof :|
|20.05.2012 17:05, Silvia Greche from São Paulo-Brasil :|
An very important subject! Too bad it doesn`t meet the interests of the great mass of the population.
|23.11.2011 17:20, Ken Ranney from Peterborugh, Ontario :|
Readers might be interested in a paper I have co-authored: A Note on the Role of Chance in the Formation of Proteins and the Darwinist Theory of Evolution, at
The paper calculates probabilities for the random generation of DNA necessary to produce well-known proteins, rather than calculating the probability of random arrangements of proteins. The latter, though common in the literature, is a false approach i.e. it does not conform with what is known about the synthesis of proteins.
|03.10.2011 07:58, gert korthof :|
thanks for the recommendation. I wonder: was there a particular webpage or remark or whatever that triggered your advice?
|03.10.2011 02:05, Alex Palazzo from Toronto :|
I highly suggest that you read Michael Lynch's book The Origins of Genome Architecture (2007). It covers how population genetics can be used to describe eukaryotic genome organization.
|22.04.2011 16:38, Stefano Marcelli from Darfo Boario Terme - Italy :|
I thank you very much for your site that I found searching news about Lima de Faria.
IMHO the problem of biologists is that - because of having been too much oppressed in the past by all sort of religions, priests and creationism - they don't want to hear to talk about "invisible" any more. But the greatest forces the complex living beings move against and toward are of physical nature: gravity and sunlight. My evolution from a MD to a "monstrous" :-) kind of evo-devo biologist is due to these observations: http://tinyurl.com/4pkeaf4
|01.03.2011 03:49, Keith Allpress :|
In regard randomness - I think you are simply talking about operations, eg rotation, reflection, folding and other algebraic operations that transform hands into other hands, plus the idea of self-symmetry, transforms that can operate within a pattern. As a programmer I learn to look for behaviours, this is what distinguishes patterns into classes of behaviour.
The properties of the pattern determine how the steps needed to encode the pattern - more intrinsically ordered patterns should have algorithmic procedures to synthesise them, less ordered patterns will be less algorithmic. Also evolution might favour patterns that had fewer synthetic steps.
|25.11.2010 08:13, gert korthof :|
I know your name from the countless Amazonreviews!
We share interest in a lot of subjects, and as far as I can see, you are reviewing books as long as I do.
Success with everything!
|24.11.2010 19:37, Todd I. Stark from Philadelphia, Pa. USA :|
Gert, thanks so much for maintaining this very valuable site for the past decade. Your efforts are very much appreciated and I think this is an extremely valuable educational resource that should be more widely utilized.
You deserve a great deal of credit for your expert handling of the materials here as well as their breadth and depth.
I was very pleased to see that the site is still active and has evolved from its remarkable treatment of Darwin and his followers, modifiers, and critics into the shape of biology to come. Bravo.
|06.10.2010 10:25, Dov Henis :|
Whence And Whither
2010 Update Concepts Of Life/Evolution
On Life's Twist
A. Di Mauro's RNA formation concept is great.
But, a step further is required. How had the RNA become alive, i.e. how did it (1) uptake the sun's radiation and how did it (2) catalytically use it to perform work, to keep augmenting its constrained energy by keeping augmenting its self-propagation, WHICH IS THE ESSENCE OF LIFE ?
THIS IS THE STILL MISSING TWIST IN THE BRANCHING OF LIFE FROM OTHER SURVIVING, ENERGY DIGESTING, MATTER SUCH AS BLACK HOLES. THIS TWIST IS THE BIOLOGICAL ENTITY "CULTURE", LEARNING-ADAPTING, THE ESSENCE OF DARWINIAN EVOLUTION SINCE LIFE'S DAY ONE. THIS MUST HAVE BEEN THE CRUCIAL PROCESS TWIST, EVEN WITHOUT YET KNOWING ITS MECHANISM.
Or, is the mechanism of this twist known now?
It is now known how the RNAs, Earth's primal organisms, adopt an enhanced energy event's DNA conformation. But what is the mechanism of its recognizing the enhanced energy event? Does it derive from augmented RNA propagation and alternative splicing feedback loop, or is the augmented propagation a result of an energetic feature recognized by the RNA?
B. Ponder with plain commonsense, and stick to obvious data.
Sleep and chirality are data, evidence that RNAs ARE ORGANISMS, alive, that came into being and were active prior to evolution of biometabolism. RNAs are not just "genes in the organisms". They are Earth's base primal organisms. Plain and simple. Why complicate the obvious simple evident data?
Add to this the embarrassingly obvious evident data-based concepts of the dual cycle universe, with cosmic expansion as the driver of universal evolution, the continuous melee of mass formats for energy.
Our essential science interests should be the BASIC ESSENTIAL existential matters. Seek them carefully within the infinite number of mechanisms. Focus on the mechanisms that are rational evidence for the basic matters.
This is the opinion of an old-timer, a self-considered scientist, tired of the preposterous 20th-21st centuries technology culture and of the century-old corrupt science tradeunion-guild-establishment .
(Comments From The 22nd Century)
http://www.the-scientist.com/c ommunity/user/profile/1655.pag e
Seed of Human-Chimp Genomes Diversity
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_2SF3CJ JM5OU6T27OC4MFQSDYEU/blog/arti cles/53079
03.2010 Updated Life Manifest
http://www.the-scientist.com/c ommunity/posts/list/54.page#50 65
Evolution, Natural Selection, Derive From Cosmic Expansion
http://darwiniana.com/2010/09/ 05/the-question-reductionists- fear/
|Page: < 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 >||
|Get free forums, guestbooks, calendars, shorturls and web statistics at motigo.|