"Tim Tyler"  wrote in message
news:ck13h1$1fvh$1{at}darwin.ediacara.org...
> Bill Houdek  wrote or quoted:
> > "Rob"  wrote in message
>
> > > I have a limited understanding of Evolution (A-Level),
so please
> > > excuse me if my understanding is not correct.  I want
to know if there
> > > is any research that discusses the direction of
evolution.  Sure as we
> > > evolve we adapt to best suit the current environment
but that isn't to
> > > say that evolution is a 'good thing' as it is
generally assumed?  Just
> > > because we evolve, it doesn't mean we become a better
species, just
> > > better able to cope with the current environment?  Is
statement true?
> > >
> > > Any thoughts appreciated.
> >
> > Not really sure what "better species" means. Thought we
were in a scientific
> > mode and not really able/supposed to make value
judgments.
>
> It seems as though you could talk about a "better" thermal
insulator
> or conductor - without much ambiguity or loss of
scientific rigor.
>
> In biology, "better" would make reasonable sense - if the
environment
> was specified -

Once you ranked things as better for a specific environment,
or set of standards, you might want to rank them again to
get a better "better" by judging them as to which is now
better at remaining relatively unaffected by moderate
changes in that environment. Some combination of the two
rankings may provide the "best" rating as to decent quality
AND all-round ruggedness to environmental change.
.....tonyC

>though it would not necessarily obey the transitive
> rule [i.e. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Transitive.html].
> -- 
> __________
>  |im |yler  http://timtyler.org/  tim{at}tt1lock.org  Remove
lock to reply.
>
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 10/7/04 9:54:06 PM