Darwinism
The most classic lie of all time probably, which the honourable Charles Darwin told out of necessity, was that evolution proceeds via a natural selection of the fittest, noblest and most virtuoso. It's not that this is false, its true however for the determinability factorance, and a simple truth, which can be construed as a white lie. It's not a choice attributable to a specific female of course, her mind is made up since birth by her genes, she has only filled the gap of inaction warranting correct action (a position she wouldn't otherwise assume). There is no dance, with brightly coloured display from dead skin cells, which can cause so greatly a trend that is to eventuate in the sudden and rapid development of a trait, without the concerted effort of everyone of the species in their niche of capacity.
To contend further in this reason; a real act which causes infinite success is entirely false by observational merit, but correct by a concurrent toleration from 99*% of individuals whom grant with right of passage, the subsequent status elevation of a supreme characteristic, chosen by all of the species (if only by default).
This perhaps counter contention assumes also the same factors which individuals encounter when involved in courtship, and in admission of collective integrity, against a exculpation. The levels of this are wide and complex and established into social practices, and most all are constantly challenged by the minority they suppress or oppress, i.e. those born again but still refined during imprisonment for the duration of a sentence attributed to their prior dominant character.
In contention of the very much more basic principle which is key to these processes, that is that the core deeds are already enacted; the individuals are choosing to assume the 'position of success' for correct calibrated success. As a levelling scheme whereby three individuals fail for each success, the probability of a deducible success rate is 100% determined. That means that although the male succeeds to pass on his genes, its not because they are superior, rather only out of random capacity for procreation, by which the successful attribution is consequently recognised.
In logical debate, one could contrive to say that it is actually the 'trait' which distinguishes the individual, as to be the cause for their success; but in actuality as explained, its the action of every other individual, which create the opportunity for fulfilment. Of course this is not a pure deduction, rather a majority relationship determination of perhaps 51% where for 49% of cases the individual with the superior trait would go unrecognised so sufficiently as to cause a regular reattribution of the collective integrity, so as to eventuate in their 'defacto' success (as predetermined). Of course including a uncertainty principle in which the individuals cannot actually recognise that trait whilst they seem too, or any number of other causes; means entire species also have a -1% inclusion of success. Such a trend will eventuate in their extinction at their prime time (rather than all species evolving perfectly only to all be destroyed in the peak dexterity).
Progressive concepts are far more advanced and as philosophical foundations assert, the Darwinian explanation of evolution is satisfactory, but it cannot account for actuality in any real cases, nor be relied on. On the contrary the concept of Christ nature which was introduced in Versistasis, details the structural integrity of the spacial order in temporal fortitude. This is a complex infrastructure of timespace, in which the individual cannot fully perceive, but the collective integrity assumes by good merit in diligent attention and service to the fundamental aspects of life (and hence the individual knows inherently)
To contend further in this reason; a real act which causes infinite success is entirely false by observational merit, but correct by a concurrent toleration from 99*% of individuals whom grant with right of passage, the subsequent status elevation of a supreme characteristic, chosen by all of the species (if only by default).
This perhaps counter contention assumes also the same factors which individuals encounter when involved in courtship, and in admission of collective integrity, against a exculpation. The levels of this are wide and complex and established into social practices, and most all are constantly challenged by the minority they suppress or oppress, i.e. those born again but still refined during imprisonment for the duration of a sentence attributed to their prior dominant character.
In contention of the very much more basic principle which is key to these processes, that is that the core deeds are already enacted; the individuals are choosing to assume the 'position of success' for correct calibrated success. As a levelling scheme whereby three individuals fail for each success, the probability of a deducible success rate is 100% determined. That means that although the male succeeds to pass on his genes, its not because they are superior, rather only out of random capacity for procreation, by which the successful attribution is consequently recognised.
In logical debate, one could contrive to say that it is actually the 'trait' which distinguishes the individual, as to be the cause for their success; but in actuality as explained, its the action of every other individual, which create the opportunity for fulfilment. Of course this is not a pure deduction, rather a majority relationship determination of perhaps 51% where for 49% of cases the individual with the superior trait would go unrecognised so sufficiently as to cause a regular reattribution of the collective integrity, so as to eventuate in their 'defacto' success (as predetermined). Of course including a uncertainty principle in which the individuals cannot actually recognise that trait whilst they seem too, or any number of other causes; means entire species also have a -1% inclusion of success. Such a trend will eventuate in their extinction at their prime time (rather than all species evolving perfectly only to all be destroyed in the peak dexterity).
Progressive concepts are far more advanced and as philosophical foundations assert, the Darwinian explanation of evolution is satisfactory, but it cannot account for actuality in any real cases, nor be relied on. On the contrary the concept of Christ nature which was introduced in Versistasis, details the structural integrity of the spacial order in temporal fortitude. This is a complex infrastructure of timespace, in which the individual cannot fully perceive, but the collective integrity assumes by good merit in diligent attention and service to the fundamental aspects of life (and hence the individual knows inherently)
Comments
Post a Comment