Anthriel wrote: I thought I was told upthread that if one were a "Creationist" that one believed in the Christian bible's "tales and timeline" 7 days of Creation literally, and that one was NOT a "Creationist" if one "only" believed in... you know... creation and a Creator. You know, the more open-minded types.
I suppose someone who believed that the land was literally made from Ymir's body and heavens from his skull, they would be labeled Creationists, too. But since in the U.S. one mostly deals with the Christian majority, it is the Christian belief that is usually assumed by default.
Closer to the topic - this weekend I heard a Ranger at a State park talk about the growing number of rattle-less rattlesnakes. As with tuskless elephants, the once-harmful mutation is now becoming a benefit for survival. Intelligent species, when hearing a rattlesnake's rattle, go away and don't bother the snake. Humans seek out the snake and kill it, so the snakes born without the rattles are the ones successfully procreating.
If there was anything that depressed him more than his own cynicism, it was that quite often it still wasn't as cynical as real life.
Frelga wrote:Closer to the topic - this weekend I heard a Ranger at a State park talk about the growing number of rattle-less rattlesnakes. As with tuskless elephants, the once-harmful mutation is now becoming a benefit for survival. Intelligent species, when hearing a rattlesnake's rattle, go away and don't bother the snake. Humans seek out the snake and kill it, so the snakes born without the rattles are the ones successfully procreating.
That's interesting. It is also an unintended side-effect for the humans, where their drive to destroy the rattlers may be nudging the species towards being more dangerous to humans since you won't get the warning rattle.
Griffon64 wrote:That's interesting. It is also an unintended side-effect for the humans, where their drive to destroy the rattlers may be nudging the species towards being more dangerous to humans since you won't get the warning rattle.
Exactly. Unintended side-effect seems to be the leitmotif of human behavior. I just hope it won't be our epitaph.
If there was anything that depressed him more than his own cynicism, it was that quite often it still wasn't as cynical as real life.
Yes, but it is interesting to see the adaptations play out when it's the humans that are the predators. Though I'd prefer it if rattle-less rattlesnakes were NOT being selected for. I appreciate the warning.
Dave_LF wrote:People aren't the only ones who do that. Any time one species preys on another, it is effectively breeding it for traits that make it harder to catch.
I imagined that post coming your cat pic which struck me as hilarious.
There was a nature show about the populations of wolves and buffalo in... Wyoming? They basically selected each other into some of the largest and boldest of their kind.
If there was anything that depressed him more than his own cynicism, it was that quite often it still wasn't as cynical as real life.
