Date: Sat, 07 Sep 2002 10:36:08 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: "Neal E. Westfall" <nwestfal@directvinternet.com> Cc: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>, Joshua Lee <yid@softhome.net>, dave@jetcafe.org, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why did evolution fail? Message-ID: <3D7A3908.41093D70@mindspring.com> References: <20020907083655.K44831-100000@Tolstoy.home.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Neal E. Westfall" wrote: > On Sat, 7 Sep 2002, Terry Lambert wrote: > > > An understanding of the characteristics of mutation in virrii, and > > > the development of new vaccines are not at all dependent on the > > > theory of evolution. Mutations != evolution. > > > > It is predictive of the mutuations. Among other things, this > > allows us to use statistics and predictive models to decide > > which flu to manufacture vaciones for, and which flu to ignore. > > *How* is evolution predictive of the mutations? One doesn't need > to be an evolutionist in order to make such predictions. Evolution in this case is merely a useful theory, in that its applicaiton gives predictive results in the problem domain of *what* mutations will survive the ambient selection pressures. I think we need to create a new list to discuss this properly, so as to provide a satisfactory answer to your question; I suggest: phd-in-epidemiology@freebsd.org -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3D7A3908.41093D70>