Re: Neoteny was Re: god makes hubey

H. M. Hubey (
25 Nov 1995 01:58:29 -0500 (Phil Nicholls) writes:

>No you wouldn't. One of the most important criteria for establishing
>homology is that the structures have a common ontogenetic origin.

YOu are confusing a few things here. The fact that some criteria
is used doesn't make it fact. That they have common ontogenic
origin cannot be "proven". It's merely an observation, like
apples look like pears or pomegranites. The resemblence is a
resemblence, and it stays at that level.

>This is a well established fact.

What is a fact?

>No, it's all science because it deals with DATA. The data in this
>case is comparative embryology.

Dealing with data does not a science make, and you should
know that by now. History deals with data. English lit
majors also deal with data. And so do... blah blah..

>I have no problem with the fact that animals vary in intelligence.


>All you have to do is present and support a method for quantifying
>intelligence in different ways that avoids circularity.

Give me a method that says that an F=ma is not circular.

>Mark's method are untouched by such mundane things as data.

Every one deals with data. Dealing with data doesn't make

This reminds me of a story that some historian allegedly said
to some scientist: "Science is a collection of facts."

My, my... how stupid, and this from a historian no less..

Poincare answered this long time ago "A house is a collection
of stones, but every collection of stones is not a house."

And if you still don't understand, let me explain to you
Aristotelian physics which worked so well, that it blocked
progress for thousands of years (until Newton).

Everything has its natural place. If things are
disturbed from their natural places they tend to
go back to their natural places. The natural places
of stars are up in the sky. The natural places of
objects on earth are on the earth. So that is why
if you throw a stone it returns back to the ground
which is its natural place. And that is why the
stars don't fall down, and stay up there in their
natural places.....

Does this "science" (i.e. Aristotle's physics) sound like
anything you know?

Do you also want to know how this system was finally defeated?
Whitehead answered it quite clearly,when he said something like:

The obsession of the medieval era with classification
retarded the development of science. If only the
schoolmen had measured instead of classify how much
more they would have learned and how much faster
would science have made progress.


Learn your lessons well, Nicholls :-)...

If I were you, I'd sign up on some of those philosophy and
science newsgroups. You can't be an ignorant idiot all your
life. If this continues you'll go the way of the dinosaurs, extinct :-)

PS. Try not to be such an arrogant person... There's much you
need to learn yet. The first step is to recognize ignorance.
Then you won't insult so many people, nor will you get
insulted in return.


Regards, Mark