Kill the Economy

[OKIsItJustMe]

137. It is an interesting viewpoint

I rather liked Lovelock’s suggestion that we are like spacesuits for anaerobic bacteria, who had hopelessly polluted their environment with oxygen.

More to the point, it appears (for example) that, rather than humans “domesticating” canids, humans and canids may have coevolved.

http://today.ucla.edu/portal/ut/an-evolutionary-tale-about-dogs-193185.aspx

[font face=Serif]Mar 03, 2011

[font size=5]An evolutionary tale about dogs and humans[/font]

[font size=3]A study of the evolution of dogs has opened new and unparalleled doorways to understanding how genes and the genome produce diversity, people attending a recent symposium hosted by the UCLA Center for Society and Genetics learned.

Held Feb. 25-26, the two-day public symposium, “Made for Each Other? Dog and Human Co-evolution,” brought together geneticists, behaviorists, dog lovers and trainers, historians, cultural anthropologists, ecologists, artists and many others to discuss the genesis of dogs and explore the changing and complex relationship between dogs and humans.

Dogs and humans have essentially evolved alongside each other, migrating together across continents. Today, there are no human populations that do not have dogs as an integral part of their culture.

All dogs — those that are considered “village” animals who still roam in packs and breed at will, as well as those that are “breed” dogs who live with humans — share a common ancestor, the wolf. But there was no single wolf-to-dog event that created the dog, according to genetic analyses and the fossil record, said Robert Wayne, UCLA professor in ecology and evolutionary biology. Rather, the emergence of the dog was an ongoing, long-term, widespread process as wolf populations interacted with humans.

…[/font][/font]

And if this is the case with canines, why not other “domesticated animals?”

And if it is true of “domesticated animals” why not “domesticated plants” as well?

Of course, where does this speculation end?

If we breed a monster turkey, are we doing the turkey’s bidding?
http://science.kqed.org/quest/2012/11/19/turkey-trouble-genetics-gone-too-far/

[font face=Serif][font size=5]Turkey Trouble: Genetics Gone Too Far?[/font]

Post on Nov 19, 2012 by Dr. Barry Starr from QUEST Northern California

We've bred these poor things to the point where they can't even reproduce anymore without our help.

[font size=3]No, this isn’t a blog about genetically modified organisms — that has been argued enough lately! Instead, in honor of Thanksgiving, I want to talk about regular old selective breeding and the monsters it can create: the industrial turkey, the main course at most dinner tables on Thursday.

What we have all conspired to do to this once noble bird is appallingly awful. In our drive for more healthy white meat, we have selected for giant versions of turkeys with grotesquely over-sized breasts. How over-sized? Their breasts are so big at this point that these poor things can’t successfully mate. Every industrial turkey was created by artificial insemination.

Not only that, but all of that extra muscle has created birds in constant pain. Their bones just can’t easily handle all of that muscle being packed on so quickly. Add the damage to their hearts and the resulting high rate of heart attacks and you have something pretty close to monstrous.

And remember, we didn’t engineer these things at all. These caricatures of wild turkeys were hidden in the turkey genome all along.

…[/font][/font]

If Monsanto produces a new GM strain of corn, are they simply doing the corn’s bidding?