Re: That (not so) idiot Darwin

From: John Marlow (johnmarlow@gmx.net)
Date: Tue Jan 16 2001 - 01:59:25 MST

Next message: Adrian Tymes: "Immortality decay (was Re: Stewart Brand's The Clock of the Long Now)"
Previous message: KPJ: "Re: Stewart Brand's The Clock of the Long Now"
In reply to: J. R. Molloy: "Re: That (not so) idiot Darwin"
Next in thread: Eugene.Leitl@lrz.uni-muenchen.de: "Re: That (not so) idiot Darwin"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Not that I disagree with them--but these are not my words you've responded
to.

john marlow

---
J.R. Molloy wrote:
From: "John Marlow" <johnmarlow@gmx.net>
> ...that something else important might be going on
> which we can't see yet, that merrits attention too.
Sure it does. 
Here, have a whiff of White Powder of Gold, and maybe you'll see it. 
--J. R. 
The future of machines is biology. 
--KK
-- 
The strength to change what I can, the inability to accept what I 
can't, and the incapacity the tell the difference. --Calvin
Sent through GMX FreeMail - http://www.gmx.net

Next message: Adrian Tymes: "Immortality decay (was Re: Stewart Brand's The Clock of the Long Now)"
Previous message: KPJ: "Re: Stewart Brand's The Clock of the Long Now"
In reply to: J. R. Molloy: "Re: That (not so) idiot Darwin"
Next in thread: Eugene.Leitl@lrz.uni-muenchen.de: "Re: That (not so) idiot Darwin"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:04:55 MST