This One\'s for David (General)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Saturday, January 23, 2010, 16:42 (5230 days ago) @ David Turell

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-01/aaft-sdm011510.php
> > 
> > You like to point out that we borrow from nature all the time, here's one that is a textbook case.
> 
> Thanks for the push. I'd seen the headline but hadn't pursued it. It is interesting how clever DNA can be. I still wonder where all the intelligent info behind the code came from. Here's another interesting entry: how artifical selection pushed dogs beyond what natural selection would allow:
> 
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100120093525.htm-This should be a fun discussion!-The way I see it, natural selection would only allow changes if there was some need to change, ie, change in food, climate, etc. -Humans in domestic dogs provide the change in that we're actively selecting for some kind of trait. What the story confirms to me, is that wolves are extremely well adapted; they don't need to change, so they don't. Domesticated dogs have an artificial need to change. -Or said another way, you might say that natural selection is too passive, but it is a fitting explanation to why the possible variation displayed by dogs didn't happen in wolves.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"