Flipped at 110 and Lived!!
01-23-2002, 11:54 AM
#41
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Santa Clara
Posts: 1,607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, <smirk> I wouldn't blindly say Darwin was right either.
Survival of the fittest is a verifiable truth, and really can't be argued. Lab research with Drosophila (fruit flies) demonstrate natural selection all the time -- put a bunch of flies into an environment that favors some characteristic, and, sure enough, in a few generations all of the flies will have that characteristic. There have been a number of observed cases of natural selection at work, too: when an ecology or climate suddenly changes, for example. Natural selection is often called microevolution, and it's pretty much not open for debate, because there is so much empirical evidence in support of it. Species adapt to their surroundings through microevolution.
Macroevolution, on the other hand, is the term given to changes that give rise to new species -- such as the evolutionary bifurcation of the ape and modern man. No one has yet observed such a speciation, because they take an enormously long time to occur. The typical theories involve some kind of habitation bisection, in which two groups of initially identical animals are separated, their adaptations take different paths, and they become distinct species. It sure sounds good on paper, and the proliferation of commonalities between all kinds of animals looks like good evidence. But, it's never quite been proven.
- Warren
Survival of the fittest is a verifiable truth, and really can't be argued. Lab research with Drosophila (fruit flies) demonstrate natural selection all the time -- put a bunch of flies into an environment that favors some characteristic, and, sure enough, in a few generations all of the flies will have that characteristic. There have been a number of observed cases of natural selection at work, too: when an ecology or climate suddenly changes, for example. Natural selection is often called microevolution, and it's pretty much not open for debate, because there is so much empirical evidence in support of it. Species adapt to their surroundings through microevolution.
Macroevolution, on the other hand, is the term given to changes that give rise to new species -- such as the evolutionary bifurcation of the ape and modern man. No one has yet observed such a speciation, because they take an enormously long time to occur. The typical theories involve some kind of habitation bisection, in which two groups of initially identical animals are separated, their adaptations take different paths, and they become distinct species. It sure sounds good on paper, and the proliferation of commonalities between all kinds of animals looks like good evidence. But, it's never quite been proven.
- Warren
01-23-2002, 12:08 PM
#42
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Almaden Valley, CA
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Warren,
Dude, you need to go to bed and quit watching TLC and Discovery after midnight. You probably have about ten buckets of Quick-n-Brite at your place, don't you?
Dude, you need to go to bed and quit watching TLC and Discovery after midnight. You probably have about ten buckets of Quick-n-Brite at your place, don't you?
01-23-2002, 02:36 PM
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Inrepair, I wouldn't presume to comment on your driving skill, common sense, truthfulness, or other attributes many seem to feel it's their province to judge, but I do suspect at least a few of these sanctimonious critics are blissfully ignoring their own past transgressions.
So I say, hopefully you've learned a valuable lesson and will be able to get your car back on the road.
cal
So I say, hopefully you've learned a valuable lesson and will be able to get your car back on the road.
cal
01-23-2002, 02:40 PM
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by lane
It's funny that only inrepair has noticed the real cause of this crash, his looking in the rear view mirror. Since you tend to steer where you look, he probably introduced a small, but sharp, steering input which unbalanced the car.
It's funny that only inrepair has noticed the real cause of this crash, his looking in the rear view mirror. Since you tend to steer where you look, he probably introduced a small, but sharp, steering input which unbalanced the car.
INREPAIR, if you are as you claim an "experienced racer", you would know that that kind of driving belongs on the track ONLY, and is never appropriate for the street, no matter how good of a driver you are or what kind of car you have. The sad thing about people such as yourself is that it usually takes nearly losing your life to figure out what, to most of us, is pure common sense.
BTW, I am sure glad you live in Kentucky and don't drive on the same roads as me, my family and friends.
-Nick
01-23-2002, 02:49 PM
#46
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Dunstable
Posts: 573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Y'all are mean, poor guy probably has the biggest shot of adrenaline in his life...(adrenaline is similar to Nos) and y'all are raggin on him, had he not survived i hope you would all take a different approach to his story. the truth is our car saved his life.
01-23-2002, 02:51 PM
#47
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Santa Clara
Posts: 1,607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4Cars1Teenager,
That's equivalent to the following statement: "Y'all shouldn't be ragging on that kid who picked up a gun and took a shot at another kid, because the gun misfired and no one died."
Get real.
- Warren
That's equivalent to the following statement: "Y'all shouldn't be ragging on that kid who picked up a gun and took a shot at another kid, because the gun misfired and no one died."
Get real.
- Warren
01-23-2002, 03:23 PM
#48
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Savannah
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4Cars1Teenager,
If he hit and killed your wife or your son, I don't think you would brush it off like you just did. You want adrenaline, ride a roller coaster.
Phi
If he hit and killed your wife or your son, I don't think you would brush it off like you just did. You want adrenaline, ride a roller coaster.
Phi
01-25-2002, 01:05 PM
#49
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Dunstable
Posts: 573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well that wasn't too friendly.... I do not condone racing, near a school or anywhere on the street. He made a bad call but you guys need to realize he lived, and he will never forget the ride. And i assume he will be more careful in all his choices from now on
01-25-2002, 01:40 PM
#50
Former Moderator
Originally posted by 4Cars1Teenager
Y'all are mean, poor guy probably has the biggest shot of adrenaline in his life...(adrenaline is similar to Nos) and y'all are raggin on him, had he not survived i hope you would all take a different approach to his story. the truth is our car saved his life.
Y'all are mean, poor guy probably has the biggest shot of adrenaline in his life...(adrenaline is similar to Nos) and y'all are raggin on him, had he not survived i hope you would all take a different approach to his story. the truth is our car saved his life.
1) Someone does something stupid.
2) The stupid action results in a wrecked S2000.
3) They post here.
4) We're not supposed to point out that they did something stupid because you shouldn't "kick a man when he's down" and if we say something someone jumps all over those of us that believe in responsible driving.
What I want to know is when IS it appropriate to tell someone that they are driving like an idiot? Should we wait a month and then say "hey, by the way , remember that accident you got into? That was stupid." I'm just pondering here. I don't know when it's appropriate and I certainly don't enjoy kicking people when they are down. However, when innocent lives are at stake, I also don't think just shutting up all the time is the answer either.