virus: About David Leeper

Tadeusz Niwinski (
Sat, 16 Nov 1996 01:35:43 -0800

David Leeper,
>Tadeusz Niwinski wrote:
>> Again, I am suspicious: WHERE in "CMI" does Dawkins say that Evolution
>> *can't* go down the hill?
>Pages 134-135. He says it four times.
>"if only they could force their way down a little valley in order to
>reach the foot of the next highest peak."
>"To say it again, goin down the slopes of Mount Improbable is not
>allowed by natural selection"
>"Going down valleys is forbidden by natural selection."
>"if only natural selection would relax its grip for a short while,
>the species might edge is way down the foothill far enough to cross
>a valley."
>Boy Tad, you personal hero sure is an idiot. :-p

Bad news David, he is still my personal hero, and you are going "down the
slopes". After reading the four of the above quotes I thought "this
Dawkins really must be an idiot if he so stubbornly claims there is no way
down. I did mention to David about what Richard Dawkins said in Seattle,
so if David saw it in the book, he would honestly acknowledge it". I
almost thought I lost my idol, but then I remembered Cohesive Math, where
subtracting half from the truth is still called truth. I thought: "the
answer to David's criticism must be on the very pages he takes the half-
truth from". I knew I could count on you, David!

In fact Dawkins does not say Evolution "*can't* go down" (which was my
original question -- see above). He uses words "not allowed" and
"forbidden". Here is how he explains it in his very words:

"I've stressed that going downhill is not allowed, but not allowed by whom?
And can it _never_ happen? The answer to both questions is about the same
as for the case of a river not being 'allowed' to run in any direction
other than along its established watercourse. Nobody actually orders the
water to stay within the banks of a river but, for well-understood reasons,
it normally does. Just occasionally, however, it overflows the banks, or
even bursts them, and the river may be found to have altered its permanent
course as a result."

Then he gives two situations when "relaxation" is likely to occur.

"There may be bonanzas of opportunity and relaxation of selection when a
virgin continent is first colonized after being cleaned out by a
catastrophe. Perhaps after the dinosaurs became extinct, the remaining
mammals had such a field day of opportunity that some of their lineages
'relaxed their guard', went temporarily downhill, and thereby found higher
peaks of Mount Improbable from which they would normally have been

The other case is "fresh genes from other places".

Who is an idiot, David?

On the other hand you made my day by responding to my SPERM model of
Evolution. Thank you. I thought nobody cared...

One more thing -- just between us Gods:

>No Tad. You are infected with the Homo Vocare (HV) virus.
>You see God as something other than yourself. In your case,
>God is Dawkins. You are giving the same type of reaction
>that would come from a Christian if I had started a "Jesus
>is an idiot" thread. The HV virus is causing you to defend
>your God using any means, and preventing you from seeing
>reality as She really is.

Good try. You can even call me X-Dawkins-ian. So far David McF was doing
a pretty good job with your envy-driven hatred towards Dawkins. I just
wanted to concentrate on *the way* you can make anybody (even Dawkins) an
idiot. I see some (memetically sound, ie. filthy) patterns. It would not
be a bad idea to write a book "Making of an Idiot"...

The Homo Vocare virus seems quite ingenious. In your case you see God in
David Leeper and perceive it something other than yourself! Try calling
him Zero for a change and see if it helps.

Tad Niwinski from TeTa where people grow
Danger!!! Danger!!! DANGER!!!
The Level-3 Hypocrisy Virus (L3HV) is threatening YOU and your children!
PROTECT yourself: never talk to an infected person without a condom!