Re: Neoteny was Re: * makes hubey

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Paul Crowley: "Re: Repost on predation"
• Previous message: H. M. Hubey: "Re: Neoteny was Re: god makes hubey"

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

Hubey (hubey@pegasus.montclair.edu) wrote:
>Fetus yes.

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

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

A fetus is the earliest stage of ontogeny. When working out
ancestor-descendant relationships, where do you propose we draw
the line as to what stage of development is relevant and what stage is not?
In gathering data, biologists use all stages of development to draw
conclusions. You just grab one narrow ontogenetic age range and start
arm-waving wildly, while claiming that you can "see" what our
descendants will look like in the distant future. Can you say "Jean
Dixon"?

Hubey wrote:
>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.

Sit down, take your lithium tablets, and relax, Mark.
<pb>

• Next message: Paul Crowley: "Re: Repost on predation"
• Previous message: H. M. Hubey: "Re: Neoteny was Re: god makes hubey"