>...................
>'basic ones'? If aging was a result of 'basic' errors, evolution would
>soon had found a way to prevent aging which is not the case for our
>species.
>...................
I disgree with you... I simply include the hability developped by some
animals of transforming the environment as a consequence of evolution. In
particular, the humans get to change its *own* physical characteristics (
the possibility of using glasses is a consequence of evolution "acting"
through humans... or not ???). This way, evolution * found a way * to seeing
better...
I simply do not understand why is the so-called artificiallity still
considered as an opposite to naturallity, instead of a particular case of
it.........
Respectfully,
Gomes