On 26/07/2006, at 11:30 AM, jdiebremse wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Very interesting ones, but
indisputably human.
You use that word "indisputably", but doesn't the fact that a new
species name has been proposed *by definition* imply that at least one
person believes the HeLa to be non-human?
No. It means that one person believes that the modifications in the
HeLa cell line mean that it is a self-contained breeding group, and
could therefore be considered a species. In fact, a new genus. A new
class of unicellular life that has evolved from humans. It's an
interesting viewpoint, and the reasoning is correct from a certain
perspective, but it really isn't that important - the entire concept
of species itself is highly mutable and applied differently under
different circumstances. Different criteria are used depending on
circumstance, and bacteria, plants, fungi, protists and animals all
have slightly different applications. It's back to the whole blurry
red-purple-blue thing. It's easy to tell a cat from a day. But a
chihuahua from a great dane? If all other dogs ceased to exist,
they'd be considered two species, as they're separate breeding groups...
After all, how can you
propose a new species name for humanity?
Very easily. _Homo technologia_ could be the next step, if they form
a separate breeding group from baseline humans.
Species change and branch and fade. That's how it is. We're not any
different, nor are we subjected to different biological or physical
laws to any other animal.
Charlie
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
