Re: Neoteny was Re: god makes hubey

H. M. Hubey (hubey@pegasus.montclair.edu)
22 Nov 1995 21:26:48 -0500

n8010095@cc.wwu.edu (Phillip Bigelow) writes:

> A human fetus expresses webbed manus and pes, which points to our
>amphibious past (probably sometime in the Devonian).

Fetus yes.

>Yet, you make the claim that a human fetus
>resembles it's evolutionary future state.

This is pretty low. Is it possible that you don't know the
difference between fetus and baby?

> Ontogeny is another strong indicator or ancestor-descendent relationships.

Yeay, if I said this I'd be asked for proof, but the poor
guy read it in a book with latin names in it so it
makes it scientific :-)..

Good grief. From bone gazing to fetus gazing and it's all
science because they slap latin names on everything they see.,

But their observation powers immediately fail like a car that
refuses to start up on a cold January morning as soon as time
comes to realize that animals vary in intelligence and that
some kind of an absolute intelligence scale would have
to take that into account.

>Ontogeny is strongly correlative with neoteny in showing
>temporally-retrograde evolutionary relationships.

Say what? correlated how? It seems like something strange happens?

LIke the chimps morphology. If it continued in the same direction
it would wind up with very short legs and very long arms, not like
humans at all.

> Mark, if you need help learning this biology/paleontology stuff, I will be
>glad to provide you a list of references to get you caught up.

Read above. Maybe you should learn to read first :-)..

And yes, if I need some help in making up latin names for things
that need explanations and when I want to cover up my ignorance
of the phenomenon by giving it a latin name, I'll call you.

PS. Don't hold your breath.

-- 





				Regards, Mark

				http://www.smns.montclair.edu/~hubey