THE BEAGLE DOES LEAK

There's a little shock item you might be interested in when you click the header. It seems to me rather Machiavellian in the worst sense of that term. It purports to tell you what you're worth to your country. Not sure if I believe that article. . An apology for my failure to continue the saga of the Beagle and her youthful "scientist" herewith. The death of someone you almost met, but had admiration for, can be most unsettling. Here's to you, Mark. . There are many things I find disquieting about the "theory" of evolution. And many things I find satisfying. Well, some things, anyway. It seems strange that we willingly accept that various "species" of mankind existed side by side, interbred, did (or did not) discriminate against each other (how would you really know?) Killed each other in the equivalent of modern wars, got along peacefully and learned from each other, ate the same foods, did not eat the same foods, drew cave paintings, did not draw them and on and on and on. . Dichotomy's abound. Since it seems to me that if other beings can draw conclusions based on opinions, so can I. So can you. In fact we can have a plethora of opinions, if we want to. How about writing a post on whether or not (including why) you believe as you do? Is the theory of relativity true or are the facts bent to conform to someone's wishes? Please do not bring religion into the discussion (I'm composing a post about that, too.), but stay in young Mister Darwin's theory. . Dang it, trouble with Blogger. Posting this now (I hope).

THE BEAGLE SAILS AGAIN?

Here is an artist's conception of what the Beagle looked like off the Galapagos Islands. (I absolutely love the tall ships.)

.

Like the pictures painted, not from memory, but from other's conceptions of what once was. And the influence(s) of their lives and those lives who had gone before them.

.

Which is why I do not accept any "pictures" of the great religious leaders (or any others) whose conceptualization came after they had died and were long gone from being seen.

.

And why I have trouble accepting "pictures" of various animals and homo erectus (or whatever) as looking like "so" and "so". There isn't any way we can ever really know (until we get time travel -- another pet peeve of mine) and we can say "Oh, her hair was black, his was red". "Their skin color was light brown, the others was more pink and those others were green." So please don't tell me the dinosaur was brownish with a red coxcomb over its nose. My theory doesn't accept your version.