<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif;font-size:12pt"><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;"><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">From:</span></b> Lee Berman <severiansola@hotmail.com><br><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><font face="Tahoma" size="2"><b><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span></b></font>...<br><br>>And again I'd like to make the comparison to Inhumi. First we think they are just<br>>vampires. A variation of a human being. Then we find they are scaly, clawed and<br>>reptilian in nature. But then, the big revelation at the end of RttW..they have<br>>external fertilization. So they are more primitive than reptiles. (maybe fish <br>>even? heh@ Fomalhaut= Inhumi's Mouth).<br> ...<br><br>I'm not going to try to check whether I've said this
when you made similar statements--I'm just going to point out that it's not the inhumi's nature that's reptilian; it's their appearance. They're nothing like Earth reptiles in their behavior. And I see no discrepancy between reptilian appearance and external fertilization. I see no reason evolution on Blue-Green should have gone the same way it did on Earth, no reason we have to adjust our ideas about them when we learn about their fertilization or even if they have some mysterious essential link to trees and vines.<br><br>Jerry Friedman<br></div></div>
</div><br>
</body></html>