Genetic Variation (Introduction)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Saturday, September 25, 2010, 21:12 (5172 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

Balance,
> Most of this information could be gathered quite readily. Then, based off the results, they could gather specimens from the identified fauna, and test for side effects. Even if they found none, and it later turned out that they were wrong, I could give them credit for trying. But as you pointed out, they were given a budget and a deadline and forced to proceed, damn the consequences. The fact that bees are responsible for a tremendous amount of pollination has been known for so long that it is anecdotal. What I am promoting is slow, stable, growth instead of fast, reckless, growth.
-And that's exactly what I think the problem is. -What is an acceptable growth rate? 
What if the research we're talking about is like the Manhattan Project? 
Who gets to decide what the "proper" rate is? What is an acceptable error rate?
If we know that generally speaking, we learn much better from mistakes than from successes, who are we to stop the rate of mistakes? -My greater argument is that no one decides to muck things up, but they do--typically due to a paradigmatic shortfall--not typically because they were careless or lazy.

--
\"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.\"