Well, “blebs” is a great new word, anyway.
BBC: “Another researcher was more critical of the study and said the role of oxygen was overstated.” Some animals need very little.
If an establishment figure can safely write this kind of thing, Darwin’s theory is coming under more serious fire than ever.
The theory has everything going for it but evidence. But today, why should that be a problem?
If so, it makes sense. The quantum world exists, whether anything uses it or not, but in nature everything tends to get used.
Plato may win the argument, but there is increasing evidence that many metaphysical naturalists are past all that “argument” stuff.
Maybe we could get serious answers about origin of life if we started by taking the problem seriously – from an engineering perspective.
We breed dogs that are useful to us but come at the expense of survival skills.
I’m reading Jim Baggott’s book, Farewell to Reality, which criticizes the direction that modern science is now taking. He wants to demonstrate what “real” science should look like, and what is instead catching the attention of modern physicists. I wrote about this sort of stuff over two years ago, at about the same time as […]
Like how would we know this “selfish gene baby football” from a supposedly plausible hypothesis?
Rousselle: Wait, what? The Church published an encyclical 64 years ago saying exactly what Pope Francis said yesterday? You don’t say!
Oh wait. Rebuttal? But isn’t rebuttal a problem? Should you even be reading it?
So the officials mean that MSU is really a university and not just another tax-funded degree mill?
After several winnowings. Chris Hadfield was the first Canadian to walk in space. Took pictures.
By the way, haven’t we been here before? Didn’t we agree a while back that we would never eat lunch in this dump again?