Similarly, it is possible to explain the origin of the azygos ballooning bag the seal of hohloch (Cistofora cristata), a curious fishing the device in the form Carovigno appendage on the head of the Lophius piscatorius or monkfish, spurs on the wings of certain birds, the weapons of the sword-fish or the saw-fish earrings in poultry and many other similar features which cannot be explained by the effect of use or disuse, but which is explainable as the result of natural selection acting in the fact direction or the other. Secondly, Darwin, showing us how arose innumerable modifications of form, structure and colouring, at the same time has shown how by maintaining a favorable modifications could be new education. For example, the first step in the development horns on the heads of various herbivorous animals could be a calloused growths caused by the habit of butting; such growths, originating functionally, could then evolve due to selection, in the most favorable direction. This explanation cannot be applied to the unexpected appearance of the second pair of horns, which often happens at sheep: such an appendage, if he was virtuous, would be a permanent sign due to natural selection. Similarly, changes the number of vertebrae cannot be explained by the influence of the use of or disuse; but if we admit the possibility of spontaneous or correct, random variation, we understand that if the extension the vertebra (as in some pigeons) would have been a favorable modification, that experience better fit could turn into permanent feature. In the future, such an increase of the vertebrae could occur these long strips of vertebrae, what we see, for example, of the snakes. Absolutely the same can be said about Breasts. There is nothing unreasonable in the assumption that due to the greater or less consumption, transmitted by inheritance in the successive generations, dairy cancer could grow or shrink in size. But may not be and question, do does that explanation to the change in the number of mammary glands.
Do they exist by the will of a deity? And what is their nature, if they act against the will of the deity? And another question as these auxiliary forces act, in each case, if the steering controls will not them? Body developing its ability to function, developing it under the influence of these forces in the presence and under the control of the Mind, or he develops in the absence of the Mind? To say that he develops in his no, it's the same as to abandon the hypothesis, on the other hand, if to say that the "governing Mind" is necessary there, we have to assume the existence of a separate dispensation in each individual on each individual creation in the Universe. One more question if "the Providence of the deity refers to the forces of peace, as in humans, the power of the mind refers to other forces, low", how "Providence" can be considered as causes of evolution? Human mental forces are forces low not how the Creator relates to his creation and not as a regulator to adjustable, if only in the most narrow limits. A large part of the forces operating in man, both structural and functional, certainly not subject to his mental strength. Moreover, enough to damage the nerve to see that the power of mental strength over physical depends also from the physical conditions, and having taken by mistake instead magnesia morphine, we will discover that the power of physical strength over spiritual not due to anything spiritual. However, without dwelling on these matters, I will only pay attention to the perfect disagreement of this opinion with the former, to which I have already pointed out. Assuming that Mr. Martino, when it comes, will choose the former opinion, which only has something in their defense and how evolution will become more clear if we assume that inside it everywhere there is the Mind, as the cause.
2 comments:
Similarly, it is possible to explain the origin of the azygos ballooning
bag the seal of hohloch (Cistofora cristata), a curious fishing
the device in the form Carovigno appendage on the head of the Lophius piscatorius
or monkfish, spurs on the wings of certain birds, the weapons of the sword-fish or
the saw-fish earrings in poultry and many other similar features
which cannot be explained by the effect of use or disuse, but
which is explainable as the result of natural selection acting in the fact
direction or the other. Secondly, Darwin, showing us how
arose innumerable modifications of form, structure and colouring, at the same time
has shown how by maintaining a favorable modifications could
be new education. For example, the first step in the development
horns on the heads of various herbivorous animals could be a
calloused growths caused by the habit of butting; such growths,
originating functionally, could then evolve due to selection, in
the most favorable direction. This explanation cannot be applied to
the unexpected appearance of the second pair of horns, which often happens at
sheep: such an appendage, if he was virtuous, would be
a permanent sign due to natural selection. Similarly, changes
the number of vertebrae cannot be explained by the influence of the use of or
disuse; but if we admit the possibility of spontaneous or
correct, random variation, we understand that if the extension
the vertebra (as in some pigeons) would have been a favorable modification,
that experience better fit could turn into permanent
feature. In the future, such an increase of the vertebrae could occur
these long strips of vertebrae, what we see, for example, of the snakes. Absolutely
the same can be said about Breasts. There is nothing unreasonable in
the assumption that due to the greater or less consumption,
transmitted by inheritance in the successive generations, dairy
cancer could grow or shrink in size. But may not be
and question, do does that explanation to the change in the number of mammary glands.
Do they exist by the will of a deity? And what is their nature, if they
act against the will of the deity? And another question as these auxiliary forces
act, in each case, if the steering controls will not
them? Body developing its ability to function, developing it under
the influence of these forces in the presence and under the control of the Mind, or he
develops in the absence of the Mind? To say that he develops in his
no, it's the same as to abandon the hypothesis, on the other hand, if
to say that the "governing Mind" is necessary there, we have
to assume the existence of a separate dispensation in each individual on
each individual creation in the Universe. One more question if
"the Providence of the deity refers to the forces of peace, as in humans, the power of the mind
refers to other forces, low", how "Providence" can be
considered as causes of evolution? Human mental forces are
forces low not how the Creator relates to his creation and not as a regulator to
adjustable, if only in the most narrow limits.
A large part of the forces operating in man, both structural and
functional, certainly not subject to his mental strength. Moreover,
enough to damage the nerve to see that the power of mental strength over
physical depends also from the physical conditions, and having taken by mistake instead
magnesia morphine, we will discover that the power of physical strength over spiritual not
due to anything spiritual.
However, without dwelling on these matters, I will only pay attention to
the perfect disagreement of this opinion with the former, to which I have already pointed out.
Assuming that Mr. Martino, when it comes, will choose the former
opinion, which only has something in their defense and how
evolution will become more clear if we assume that inside it everywhere
there is the Mind, as the cause.
Post a Comment