Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (1014)	9/22/2000 10:44:22 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

early organisms didn't exhale O2 wastes for the benefit of later animals, they just did it. Later organisms had to learn to adapt to the oxygen polution and it's resulting iron depletion. Life seems to evolve continuously taking advantage where it might. It's not like anaerobes died out. Most pathogens are anaerobes. Creation was not an instant -- it is a process. Again, I'm discussing Life and not specific lifeforms. It is our biological chauvinism that prevents many from seeing that unrelated species are doing what we do. Occasionally, it leaks through. My farmer blue jay which selects particularly good fruits and vegetables to plant in my yard. The aphid-tending ants. Bee colonies. Pairing in birds. Tool making in apes. Stealthy octopi pretending to be things they aren't. If you look at the life cycle of the slime molds (one of my favorite organisms, yeah, that probably makes me a nerdy geekoid) you will see an animal, a plant, sperm cells complete with flagella, and something that recalls the blue prints of many precursors and homologues. Who's library of data is this? Geneticists suspect that no known genetic sequence in humans is unique to humans. The linear, single branch tree of evolution (ca. 1967) is being replaced with a lattice of genetic relations that cross back and forth like the roots of a mangrove. That's pretty strange, huh? Here we are a unique species that isn't all that unique. If I went into a transistor radio, and every part in that radio existed somewhere else in some other appliance, which they do, BTW, wouldn't it be reasonable to infer that they all are getting their parts from common sources. We know this is true in life through genetics. Similarly, there are structural analogs that arise independently in unrelated species. Horn corals and the species of bivalve that looks almost exactly like it, in the Permian, I think. Hemoglobin in tube worms. There are dozens of examples in Australia and Tasmania where there are or were analogs to lion, tiger, wolf, rabbit, weasel, bear and many other animals. These external morphological forms are stored somewhere too. If you live here, you should look like this and use that. If you live there, you should look like that and use this. Many of these arise from geometry, chemistry, or physical surface area constraints, but I wonder, is that all it is? To me, it's like attributing mechanism status to the gears, but not the watch in which they reside.