Newsgroups: comp.ai.alife
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!pipex!sunic!news.chalmers.se!news.gu.se!gd-news!d6243
From: sa209@utb.shv.hb.se (Claes Andersson)
Subject: Re: Lamarckian Evolution
Message-ID: <1995Jan19.195400.24879@gdunix.gd.chalmers.se>
Sender: usenet@gdunix.gd.chalmers.se (USENET News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: d6243.shv.hb.se
Organization: Dept. of economy and computer science.
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #2.1
References: <A.J.Hirst-060195122247@uu-igor-mac.open.ac.uk> <3eufpiINN3ojd@rs1.rrz.Uni-Koeln.DE> <davesag-1701952036170001@sladl1p11.ozemail.com.au> <3fi3gh$abe@laplace.ee.latrobe.edu.au>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 02:10:43 GMT
Lines: 20

khorsell@ee.latrobe.edu.au (Kym Horsell) wrote:
>In article <davesag-1701952036170001@sladl1p11.ozemail.com.au> davesag@ozemail.com.au (dave sag) writes:
>>If aquired characteristics (physical and behavioural) can not be inherited
>>then explain how australian kookaburra's have developed the knack of
>>overturning cane toads and pecking their bellies out (and thus avoiding
>>the poison sacks).  This makes the kookaburra the only known australian
>>predator of the cane toad (apart from my car). This behaviour has only
>>been reported in the last few years and now is quite widespread.
>
 I get so tired.. firstly: No one here seems to understand the impossibility of
Lamarckian evolution. It is very easily dispatched since it would that some sort
of magic gene-construction. It was proved to be wrong long before even the DNA
was found and dragging it up is like dragging the geocentric view of the universe!

 The other thing, no one seems to know what Lamarckism is at all! Not? Why then
come with examples of Lamarckian evolution that isn't Lamarckian evolution in
any way.  It is called LEARNING. Your parents learned you to speak, and they didn't
do it via your genes.. So it is in no way Lamarckian evolution.

Claes Andersson. University of Bors. Sweden
