I can imagine a plan, but then I can imagine large blue ribbits (no typo). Sue told me to sod off out of the kitchen this afternoon and do some 'man's work'. Now I'm being shunted off to the smoking room. I fixed the car and drove it to the pub for a quick one during the test-phase. Having found a half-empty packet of Bensons I've just had a sly fag. A life in gender equality slides away! A quick cap tug and "Happy New Year Ma'am" to Gabbers. It has been a merry old domestic violence Xmas next door. Half the kids growing up in such circumstances are known to be directly abused. Large scale eugenics may be on the way in new, larger, better and more profitable wars. I see no plan there either, though suspect there may be one. That life ain't sweet does not logically exclude a god with a plan - he'd look like Baldrick in my version. We can't logically exclude the possibility our creator was just a mad scientist who dumped this universe as a failure. I had a blissful chat with a guy remembering a British Legion Club with real ale two of three miles up the canal from Stockton Heath towards Lymm. Small mercies no doubt. For those who would like to know more of evolution, I can only say there is now more free at New Scientist and the site is worth a visit. What is obvious is that we could choose to educate ourselves better and plan on the basis of evidence, rather than read the poison oracles whilst slitting chickens open. No women allowed in the bar of the Crooked Hooker Gabby - but there's a nice little, rather pink ladies' room. Not a sexists matter, one understands, it's just no women have played for or against that rugby club yet and that is the determining inclusive factor for entry. I was once a very crooked hooker, but as a rugby league man, am still barred from the Crooked Hooker. My sin was to take match fees before they became fashionable in union. Which books should we smoke in the library of exclusion Chaz?
On 30 Dec, 22:34, chazwin <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry dear, this IS the smoking room: ladies not allowed. > > On Dec 30, 9:29 pm, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Would the gentlemen please go over to the library and smoke there. > > Thank you. > > > On 30 Dez., 18:47, chazwin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Reminds me of a joke. > > > > What is the difference between a truck load of babies and a truck load > > > of ping pong balls???? > > > > .. > > > . > > > > You can't unload a truck load of ping pong balls with a pitch-fork. > > > > On Dec 30, 4:52 pm, "Chris Jenkins" <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > Hmmm...you have a point there, mate. > > > > > On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Pat > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > On 30 Dec, 02:15, "Chris Jenkins" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Having a fuckload of babies certainly ups the chances, mate... ;) > > > > > > Isn't ANY load of babies, technically, a fuckload, though? ;-) > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 8:53 PM, chazwin <[email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Dec 29, 4:45 am, "Chris Jenkins" <[email protected]> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Survival of the fittest is indeed commonly misunderstood, most > > > > > especially > > > > > > > > when it comes to humans. It's not survival of those most fit to > > > > > survive. > > > > > > > > It's survival of those most likely to procreate, and so it has > > > > > > > > been > > > > > > > through > > > > > > > > out all of evolution. > > > > > > > > Actually it is those who are able to produce successful offspring > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > their given environment. > > > > > > > Procreation is not enough in itself. > > > > > > > > > And so it is that those with nought else to do but rock the > > > > > > > > bedposts > > > > > turn > > > > > > > > out children at three times the rate... ;) > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 11:30 PM, archytas > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The phrase "survival of fittest" is widely misunderstood Many > > > > > wrongly > > > > > > > > > assume it means that evolution always increases the chances > > > > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > > species surviving. Evolution sometimes results in > > > > > > > > > individuals or > > > > > > > > > populations becoming less fit and may occasionally even lead > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > extinction. > > > > > > > > > > There are several ways in which evolution can reduce the > > > > > > > > > overall > > > > > > > > > fitness of individuals or of populations. For starters, > > > > > > > > > natural > > > > > > > > > selection can take place at different levels - genes, > > > > > > > > > individuals, > > > > > > > > > groups - and what promotes the survival of a gene does not > > > > > necessarily > > > > > > > > > increase the fitness of the individuals carrying it, or of > > > > > > > > > groups > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > these individuals. > > > > > > > > > > For example, parasitic DNA elements, or transposons, can > > > > > > > > > spread > > > > > > > > > through a population even though they make their host > > > > > > > > > organisms > > > > > less > > > > > > > > > fit. Transposons are one cause of genetic diseases such as > > > > > > > > > haemophilia. > > > > > > > > > > Similarly, selfish individuals may thrive at the expense of > > > > > altruistic > > > > > > > > > individuals in a group - making them the "fittest" - even > > > > > > > > > though > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > make the group as a whole less competitive. Such cheaters can > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > disastrous consequences. > > > > > > > > > > In 1932, J. B. S. Haldane suggested this could even lead to > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > extinction of populations - a phenomenon called evolutionary > > > > > suicide. > > > > > > > > > Models and some experimental evidence suggest he was right. > > > > > > > > > > For instance, when nutrients run low, individual myxobacteria > > > > > (slime > > > > > > > > > bacteria) may come together to form a fruiting body to produce > > > > > spores. > > > > > > > > > Lab studies have shown that cheating myxobacteria that only > > > > > > > > > produce > > > > > > > > > spores and never help form the non-spore producing parts of > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > fruiting body can drive populations to extinction. > > > > > > > > > > Genes capable of driving populations to extinction might have > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > practical use, however. Biologists are exploring the > > > > > > > > > possibility of > > > > > > > > > releasing engineered parasitic DNA into populations of > > > > > > > > > malaria- > > > > > > > > > carrying mosquitoes. > > > > > > > > > > There is concern that something similar could happen > > > > > > > > > accidentally. > > > > > > > > > Fish that have been genetically modified to produce a growth > > > > > hormone > > > > > > > > > grow faster and larger, mature earlier and produce more eggs. > > > > > > > > > But > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > are less likely to survive in the wild than unmodified fish. > > > > > According > > > > > > > > > to the Trojan gene hypothesis, a gene variant that produces > > > > > > > > > such > > > > > > > > > characteristics could spread rapidly through a wild population > > > > > despite > > > > > > > > > reducing individual fitness, and eventually drive the > > > > > > > > > population to > > > > > > > > > extinction. > > > > > > > > > > Another way in which evolution can reduce a species' chances > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > survival is through the accumulation of detrimental mutations. > > > > > > > > > Mutations provide the vital raw material for natural > > > > > > > > > selection, so > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > the mutation rate is too low a population will not be able to > > > > > evolve > > > > > > > > > fast enough to keep up with environmental changes. > > > > > > > > > > If, on the other hand, a population's mutation rate is too > > > > > > > > > high, > > > > > > > > > detrimental mutations may accumulate faster than natural > > > > > > > > > selection > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > eliminate them. Eventually, the number of mutations can > > > > > > > > > exceed the > > > > > > > > > "error catastrophe threshold", again leading to the > > > > > > > > > extinction of a > > > > > > > > > population. > > > > > > > > > > In theory, any species with a very small population could > > > > > accumulate > > > > > > > > > deleterious mutations faster than it can eliminate them. The > > > > > problem > > > > > > > > > is especially severe for asexual organisms such as the Amazon > > > > > > > > > molly > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > an effect known as Muller's rachet. > > > > > > > > > > It is far less of a problem for sexually reproducing species > > > > > because > > > > > > > > > the exchange of genetic material between chromosomes can > > > > > > > > > separate > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > and bad mutations. Some unlucky offspring get saddled with > > > > > > > > > lots of > > > > > > > > > nasty mutations and die out, while the lucky ones get hardly > > > > > > > > > any. > > > > > > > > > > In theory, a mutation catastrophe can also occur as a result > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > linkage. This refers to gene variants that are inherited > > > > > > > > > together > > > > > > > > > because they sit next to each other on a chromosome. Suppose a > > > > > > > > > mutation that greatly increases the mutation rate somehow > > > > > > > > > ends up > > > > > next > > > > > > > > > to a new mutation that greatly increases fitness. The > > > > > > > > > immediate > > > > > > > > > fitness benefits of the beneficial mutation will initially > > > > > > > > > mask the > > > > > > > > > deleterious effects of the "mutator" mutation, meaning both > > > > > mutations > > > > > > > > > will rapidly sweep through a population, ultimately with > > > > > > > > > disastrous > > > > > > > > > consequences. > > > > > > > > > > A few doctors hope to exploit mutation accumulation to treat > > > > > diseases. > > > > > > > > > Certain viruses such as HIV are already close to the error > > > > > catastrophe > > > > > > > > > threshold. Drugs that increase the mutation rate of the > > > > > > > > > viruses > > > > > still > > > > > > > > > further might push them over the threshold and drive a > > > > > > > > > population > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > viruses inside a person's body to extinction. > > > > > > > > > > Finallly, it has long been recognised that the competition > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > members of the same species to reproduce - sexual selection - > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > favour traits that reduce a species' overall fitness. Male > > > > > > > > > peacocks > > > > > > > > > with the biggest and brightest tails might get the females' > > > > > attention, > > > > > > > > > but lugging around a heavy, conspicuous tail reduces their > > > > > > > > > chances > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > survival. > > > > > > > > > > Studies of threatened bird species suggest that sexual > > > > > > > > > selection > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > indeed drive populations to extinction. Some biologists go so > > > > > > > > > far > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > to blame sexual selection for the conspicuous consumption that > > > > > > > > > threatens humanity's future. > > > > > > > > > > According to the handicap principle, features such as > > > > > > > > > peacocks' > > > > > tails > > > > > > > > > evolve precisely because they are disadvantageous. Consider an > > > > > > > > > individual who is trying to signal to females how fit and > > > > > > > > > strong he > > > > > > > > > is. If the signal is easy to make, weaker males can easily > > > > > > > > > cheat by > > > > > > > > > making the same signal. But if making the signal is costly - > > > > > > > > > such > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > growing a large, clumsy tail or giving away food - there's no > > > > > > > > > way > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > cheat. > > > > > > > > > > Proving that any of these phenomena have ever led to > > > > > > > > > extinctions in > > > > > > > > > the wild is far from easy, because any species to which this > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > happened are, of course, no longer around to study. The > > > > > > > > > indirect > > > > > > > > > evidence is growing ever stronger, though. > > > > > > > > > > The above is from this week's New Scientist. I've come > > > > > > > > > across > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > 20 misconceptions of evolution reading literature recently > > > > > > > > > and, of > > > > > > > > > course, creationist myths are legion. My interest is > > > > > > > > > indirect - > > > > > I'm > > > > > > > > > looking for examples of why our debates are so little evidence > > > > > based > > > > > > > > > for a theory of language.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
