"Radium" <glucegen1 at excite.com> wrote in message
news:1129341884.031035.110700 at g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Peter F wrote:
> > At your very young age you might still be wise enough to revise your
> > apparently premature (and, in at least this long term memory related
> > respect, already faultily formed)
> > view of What Is going on.
>> Faulity formed? I know it seems un-realistic that I would remember
> such. But I do.
>> These are not memory "illusions". I actually do remember them. There
> are songs that remind me of the Stamford house. Moreover, memories of
> that house have been re-confirmed by my parents and other relatives.
>> Those memories are not "faultily formed".
>
You misunderstood what I meant.
You, Radium, wrote:
> Is their something wierd about me than enables me to go beyond 3 years
> of age?
It is not wise to think there might be such a limit.
In respect of which I wrote, "flawed view". That's about all
there was to it.
You, Radium, wrote:
> Scientifically [at least in current research] what deteremines how
> early long-term memory starts?
It is probabilistically (realistically considered _also_ including
involvement of unforeseeable factors and events)
"determined" by the individual phenotype and its genes interacting with
concurrent environmental, conditioned past, and imprinted (as heritable
discrete alteration of the structure of chromatin) past, factors.
P
