Was Darwin Wrong? - powered by motigo.com" />
|Page: < 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 >||
|06.10.2010 06:40, gert korthof :|
thank you for your comment.
The page on the New Scientist website does not exist anymore, so I cannot fix it.
But the complete letter is reproduced at the top of my page
|04.10.2010 03:11, Reader :|
The links "Letter to the New Scientist" and the "reply" are broken. Would you please fix them? Thanks.
|25.09.2010 04:17, socratus from Israeel :|
God: Ten Scientific Commandments.
God has given to Physicists everything that necessary
to understand Him and His Genesis by Physical Laws
Scheme of Ten Scientific Commandments:
Fundamental Theory 0f Existence.
1 The Infinite Vacuum T=0K ( background- independent energy space)
2 The particle: C/D = pi, R/N= k , E = Mc^2 = kc^2 , h = 0 , i^2= -1
3 The spins: h =E/ t or ( h=kb ) and h* = h/2pi
4 The photon, the inertia: c=1, h=1
5 The electron: e^2 = h*ca, E = h*f
6 The gravitation, the star, the time and space
7 The proton
8 The atom
9 The cell
10 The Laws
a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy/mass
b) Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
c) Pauli Exclusion Principle
The test .
Every theory must be tested logically ( theoretical ) and practically
a) Theory : Dualism of Consciousness: (consciousness /
b) Practice : Parapsychology. Meditation.
Israel Sadovnik. Socratus.
|21.09.2010 16:28, gert korthof :|
You are from NORTH CAROLINA , WAKE FOREST,
using EARTHLINK INC.
I know who you are!
You are a coward to do it anonymously.
|21.09.2010 14:58, person :|
this is a fail at anything. evolution is obviously wrong. WRONG
|23.08.2010 20:24, Misja vd W :|
Het kan zijn dat de storing kwam, doordat ik te snel nog een keer op de "submit comment'-knop drukte, omdat ik dacht dat er niets gebeurde. Direct daarna werd ik doorgelinkt naar een pagina die me vertelde dat e.e.a. al gezien zou zijn (tekstherkenner kennelijk). En dan keek ik of het er al stond maar was er niets te zien. Misschien mijn ongeduld, je weet meestal niet hoe lang het duurt voor iets geplaatst wordt(en zeker niet de eerste keer) of misschien een korte storing binnen het systeem?
Vriendelijk dank voor het plaatsen alsnog van het bericht en uw reactie!
vriendelijke groet, Misja
|23.08.2010 19:58, gert korthof :|
Misja, heb de tekst gecopieerd naar evolutie.blog.com
|18.08.2010 09:27, gert korthof :|
you are confusing senapathy's theory (I presume) and mine.
|17.08.2010 14:56, darwin :|
WOW!!! Have you completely misunderstood the most basic principles of evolution!!! Evolution starts with a fertilised egg???? What planet are you on???
Read Richard Dawkins "greatest show on earth" then try again
|31.07.2010 09:51, gert korthof :|
thanks very much for your message. Great that you found my website. I have changed the description on:
Nowadays so many new books appear that I cannot read them all! So thanks again for informing me!
|30.07.2010 15:42, oren harman :|
first of all, i want to thank you warmly for your wonderful website. i find it incredibly up to date and useful, and i'm sure the entire community is thankful to you for a job well done.
there is one correction that i need to offer: you kindly mention my book 'the price of altruism' but incorrectly state that it is about altruism but restricted to george price. actually, as i'm sure you'll see when you read the book, it is the most extensive treatment of the history of altruism that exists in the literature. it is two books in one really - a grand history of attempts to crack the riddle of altruism going back to darwin, and george price's story. i'd be most grateful if you made this correction.
many thanks again for your much appreciated efforts!
|12.07.2010 15:08, gert korthof :|
Hi Adam Crow,
thank for your info relating to
I am going to find about Cicero's work and consider adding your info to the page on my website.
|12.07.2010 04:43, Adam Crowl from Australia :|
Just read your review of the book about the Design argument in antiquity and there's a good example of arguments for and against in Cicero's "On the Nature of the Gods", as well as well as multiple arguments for design in the Pseudo-Clementine literature. They're surprisingly familiar sounding and as unsatisfying as their modern day equivalents.
|17.06.2010 15:26, morris from Nairobi :|
I perused through you page, which I kind of stumbled upon. I like your arguments especially in the review of the language of god, whch led me to your site.
Now i have a request, for I wouldlike to request you to review my essay.
I will appreciate your reply.
|27.05.2010 00:06, Matthew Turner :|
Thanks for your preliminary comments. I'll try and fix these things up for the next revision (especially by adding a Summary)!
I hope you get enough spare time soon to be able to read through this book now that you have it - I very much look forward to your comments, be they favourable OR unfavourable!
Your open-mindedness and willingness to correspond with me so far has been ENORMOUSLY appreciated!
(Incidentally you may prefer the Lulu.com pdf as it is formatted exactly like the book & has page numbers in the Contents and proper footnotes - the Smashwords versions are unfortunately quite a bit messier.)
|26.05.2010 16:54, gert korthof :|
Matthew, I have found it on Smashwords site.
It works fine (with a medium font).
Please note the Contents does not give page numbers. So the reader does not know to jump to which page.
I did not see a Summary & Conclusion section.
It would be nice to give that to the reader with a busy schedule having at least 5 unread books on his desk and another 5 on his amazon wish list.
Please note, it is a good idea you have added your bio.
|26.05.2010 08:51, Matthew Turner from Japan :|
After patiently struggling with this theory for so long, it is perhaps curious that I have become so impatient. But I have decided to publicly release my book for free. I need someone - anyone - to read it! It can be downloaded as an ebook in formats suitable for all portable reading devices at:
For better formatting, please use the free pdf download at Lulu.com:
I'm not sure if these website addresses work, they seem to change every time I check, but if they don't, go to smashwords.com or Lulu.com and search under my name or the title of the book.
I've added the subtitle "a new theory of evolution" to the title, and have also added a preface that explains who I am and why I am publishing in this way. I had wanted to keep the book fairly anonymous, but it seems people are not interested unless you show them who you are.
I would still like to send you a physical copy of the book if there is any chance that you might read it (but I need your address).
Thank you once again for taking the time to respond to me!
|23.05.2010 11:17, gert korthof :|
I mean by 'reciprocal' altruism, an equal or similar time investment.
Is your solution a non-Darwinian solution? Is it different from anything published sofar by biologists?
|21.05.2010 01:23, Matthew Turner from Japan :|
Dear Gert Korthof,
Firstly, thank you so much for replying. I've been ignored so many times that my faith in the objectivity of science is seriously faltering!
I should have guessed that many other people besides me must ask you for favours! I can think of only five ways to reply to your reciprocal altruism challenge:
(1) The strength of my book is the theory, and so I have deliberately made it as easy to read as possible. I have avoided academic language; there are almost no references; and biological examples are limited to a very few. The book is short, with the theoretical section completed in just 130 pages. The cost to you of reading it is thus quite small.
(2) I am sure you will find this a stimulating, exciting book to read, even if you ultimately deem it to be flawed in some way. It has entertainment value!
(3) Darwin's theory has caused me considerable intellectual pain - the pain of suspecting that something was not quite right but not being able to pin it down. The pain of coming up with a "solution" only to find it did not quite work. The confusion and discomfort of sensing contradictions or inconsistencies but not knowing where they lay. I now finally have intellectual peace, I finally feel that I understand in basic, fundamental terms what evolution is all about. Perhaps you will feel such peace after reading this book!
(4) I can avoid your challenge altogether by claiming that the conventional conception of "altruism" is actually flawed. But I have no room to explain that here (it's in the book).
(5) Please tell me if there is anything else I can offer! A quote from you and a reference to your website on the back cover of the book (there is still time to change the book design)? Fresh high-grade Japanese green tea or some other hard-to-get Japanese product as a gift of thanks?
If you don't mind, I would like to send you a copy of the book anyway, just in case you might one day feel inclined to look through it!
|20.05.2010 08:25, gert korthof :|
Dear Matthew Turner,
fast response (without checking anything):
I am moved by your story. I recognize a lot in it.
You address the right person with the right subject.
However, I am overloaded with stuff to read, and everybody asks favours from me, such as reading their new manuscript: it is always a non-reciprocal altruism affair. How could we transform this in reciprocal altruism? I scratch your back, you scratch mine :-)
|Page: < 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 >||
|Get free forums, guestbooks, calendars, shorturls and web statistics at motigo.|