To: Maurice Winn who wrote (28663 ) 1/29/2008 12:33:09 AM From: Maurice Winn Respond to of 219951 Mq, I notice you made a mistake in the detail. That genetic defect isn't in half of China's population because they have determined that it's a good idea to abort foetuses which are lacking a Y chromosome, so there's a huge surplus of males. That seems a reversal of how nature runs things because normally nature happily kills off males since it takes only a few males to service a large number of females. The natural ratio of males to females is 1:3. There's various evidence for that, such as the father of all non-Africans arriving out of Africa 30,000 years ago whereas the mother of all non-Africans arrived about 90,000 years ago. China is going against nature, which is always a hazardous thing to do. Their sociological experiment could lead to lots of interesting outcomes related to excess young men lacking a female focal point which absorbs a lot of male energy in normal circumstances. I used to notice how customs officers were much more interested in me when traveling alone than when traveling with a wife and 4 children - they figured that any guy with that many problems would NOT be looking for more at customs and stopping the tribe and having 4 children on the loose would be irritating at best for them. People know that loose cannon males are not a good thing. Mqurice PS: I just heard on BBC TV that King George II says there's no need to panic about the US economy. Great, I can relax! Whew! I was worried there for a minute. [Yes, I am kidding - there is nothing more frightening than politicians [and others in authority] saying to keep calm] I haven't been much worried until now. Maybe I'd better get moving and head for the hills. Now, where are the hills? Hmmm, what's that hiding up on the hill with a glinting sniper-scope?