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.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (18702)	5/24/2007 3:44:21 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 218470

TJ, It's not going back for some person alive now to go to somewhere where once upon a time a horde of their ancestors lived. I have 2 parents, 4 grand parents, 8 great gps, 16 gggps, 32, 64, 128, 256, ... for 33 generations, which is about 600 or 1000 years, = 17,179,869,184 oooops, there weren't that many people. So, we can see that there was inbreeding over the centuries and a lot of it. Where should one go back to? Given that many people, it looks as though somebody could claim to go back to just about anywhere. Gene studies show a LOT of comingling of genes from all over the place. Which isn't surprising given the propensity of female primates to breed outside their immediate family groups. If people "go back" it isn't "going back" it's just going somewhere else and calling "going back". Somebody can't "go back" to somewhere where they never were. Even if they can "go back" to somewhere they actually were, such as me going back to live in Antwerp, it's all different and what I owned then, I don't own now and what I rented then, isn't available for lease now. The past has gone. When one goes back somewhere, trying to recreate even fairly recent good times, they have invariably evaporated and little more than a ghost remains. Mqurice