Ok, I was just watching "Scariest Places on Earth", which is much like "Fear" or "Ghost Hunters" or any other show that has people going into haunted places and freaking out. And watching this, I had one thought. "THAT'S NOT SCARY!"
So, here is the pitch. "SCARE ME!". I am 6', 245 pounds. I have a mixed martial arts background, tempered with a lifelong study of comparative religion and mythology. I have been a firefighter and EMT. I have seen it all. I have seen more people die than you know. I have faced accident scenes you couldn't imagine in your worst dream.
SCARE ME!
Anyone up to the challenge? I'll go anywhere, anytime. I have a healthy respect for things that can actually cause me harm (Mountain Lions, Bears, Etc). But I am "Scared" of nothing. So, if someone wants to produce the show...... Scare Me!
Christian
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Sunday, December 2, 2007
“I want to say just one word to you”
“I want to say just one word to you”
Well this time it isn’t “Plastics”. If that makes no sense, you need to catch up on your late 1960’s cultural literacy.
It also isn’t one word, or even two. It is Three names, of new technology that is going to shape the world we live in starting in the very near future. If you think they aren’t, you will probably be one of the ones left behind.
So in no particular order, in very rudimentary terms, here goes-
1) Genetic Bioengineering. We are living in an age where the first artificially produced life form is now in existence (http://www.jcvi.org/). It is a bacteria with a completely man-made chromosome. This sort of engineering goes so far beyond new strains of corn or peas. This could very well lead to organisms that eat garbage and excrete oil, or gold, or any other element in the very near future. Not to mention replacement DNA sections that could extend life, cure disease, etc. As long as the uncertainty of evolution is accounted for (as well as it can be), this could be amazing.
2) Nanotech. Nanotechnology is the science of using microscopic machines to accomplish a variety of tasks. Currently there are color changing items, controlled by remote. In the near future there will be nanotech machines that can extrude a steel I-beam, or “Grow” a building, or mine the tunnel and lay a fiber optic cable that is produced from the elements being mined. A complete factory in the palm of your hand. Machines that produce the workers, produce the repair units, produce their own replacements, all 100’s of times per minute. (Still have to deal with evolution on this one too, things the replicate, mutate and thus evolve).
3) Quantum Computing. There is a lot of speculation regarding Quantum engineering. What does it mean, is it a parallel universe, can it be bent to your will etc. All those things are still up in the air. But one thing we do know is that when a particle is observed it acts as a point and when it is not, it acts as a wave. 100% of the time. Infinitely reproducible results. This is a 2 position switch at the particle level. As soon as the technology finds a way to designate a “Point” as “1” and a “Wave” as “0” we are going to have microprocessors with switches the size of a single particle. The computing power of all the current computers in existence on your desktop.
Want to know where the world is going? Watch these three technologies. And don’t say I didn’t tell you so.
Xtian
Well this time it isn’t “Plastics”. If that makes no sense, you need to catch up on your late 1960’s cultural literacy.
It also isn’t one word, or even two. It is Three names, of new technology that is going to shape the world we live in starting in the very near future. If you think they aren’t, you will probably be one of the ones left behind.
So in no particular order, in very rudimentary terms, here goes-
1) Genetic Bioengineering. We are living in an age where the first artificially produced life form is now in existence (http://www.jcvi.org/). It is a bacteria with a completely man-made chromosome. This sort of engineering goes so far beyond new strains of corn or peas. This could very well lead to organisms that eat garbage and excrete oil, or gold, or any other element in the very near future. Not to mention replacement DNA sections that could extend life, cure disease, etc. As long as the uncertainty of evolution is accounted for (as well as it can be), this could be amazing.
2) Nanotech. Nanotechnology is the science of using microscopic machines to accomplish a variety of tasks. Currently there are color changing items, controlled by remote. In the near future there will be nanotech machines that can extrude a steel I-beam, or “Grow” a building, or mine the tunnel and lay a fiber optic cable that is produced from the elements being mined. A complete factory in the palm of your hand. Machines that produce the workers, produce the repair units, produce their own replacements, all 100’s of times per minute. (Still have to deal with evolution on this one too, things the replicate, mutate and thus evolve).
3) Quantum Computing. There is a lot of speculation regarding Quantum engineering. What does it mean, is it a parallel universe, can it be bent to your will etc. All those things are still up in the air. But one thing we do know is that when a particle is observed it acts as a point and when it is not, it acts as a wave. 100% of the time. Infinitely reproducible results. This is a 2 position switch at the particle level. As soon as the technology finds a way to designate a “Point” as “1” and a “Wave” as “0” we are going to have microprocessors with switches the size of a single particle. The computing power of all the current computers in existence on your desktop.
Want to know where the world is going? Watch these three technologies. And don’t say I didn’t tell you so.
Xtian
Monday, November 26, 2007
Gas Prices- A Common Sense View
Today I was reading another diatribe both attacking and then the response defending oil companies in regard to gasoline prices and record profits.
Each time I see this the discussion goes off into international oil markets, bounces around a bit, and ends up in name calling.
I guess it is bizarre to me that so many people seem to miss the point, so, as I see it, here it is.
The price of a barrel of oil is only the baseline of this problem, it is the benchmark, not the driving force. The problem for the last few years have been skyrocketing PROFITS, by gasoline manufacturers.
Profit is what you make over and above your operating cost. That includes buying oil at whatever price it is, refining and then distributing it to retail outlets. If oil is 10 dollars a barrel and a company makes 38 billion in profit, or oil is 100 dollars a barrel and the same company makes the same 38 billion, there is no difference.
Nothing wrong with profit. That isn't the problem. The problem is twofold from my standpoint. One, there is no such thing as a free market economy. All financial systems must have some controls to avoid one company or another that creates a vital part taking over. Then you have feudalism. So, these controls have to set certain rules. One of those rules in the United States states that there can be no collusion among competing companies. Also known as "Price Fixing", where companies agree to subvert the market pressure and agree on an artificially inflated price.
Case in point. Last year gas hit $3.00 per gallon. Industry analysts said that to support that price level, if all other things were equal (including profit), oil would have to be at 90.00 per barrel. At the time it was barely 60.00. Yet, all gas companies were charging 3.00 plus per gallon for fuel.
Flash forward. Now oil actually is hovering in the 90.00 per barrel range. And gas? It is at about 3.00 per gallon. Does something seem wrong here?? If the price of a barrel of oil is the driving factor, then last year gas should have been at around 1.98 per gallon, reflecting the 60.00 per barrel price. But it wasn't. And the oil companies that can obviously sell gas at 3.00 per gallon when oil is at 90, were selling it at 3.00 per gallon when oil was at 60. All of them. No maverick at 2.00 per gallon cornering the market. Just uniform pricing and record profit.
Does that sound like collusion? Does to me.
So please, don't quote oil prices to me. Use common sense, look at profit percentages. That's where the problem lies.
Xtian
Each time I see this the discussion goes off into international oil markets, bounces around a bit, and ends up in name calling.
I guess it is bizarre to me that so many people seem to miss the point, so, as I see it, here it is.
The price of a barrel of oil is only the baseline of this problem, it is the benchmark, not the driving force. The problem for the last few years have been skyrocketing PROFITS, by gasoline manufacturers.
Profit is what you make over and above your operating cost. That includes buying oil at whatever price it is, refining and then distributing it to retail outlets. If oil is 10 dollars a barrel and a company makes 38 billion in profit, or oil is 100 dollars a barrel and the same company makes the same 38 billion, there is no difference.
Nothing wrong with profit. That isn't the problem. The problem is twofold from my standpoint. One, there is no such thing as a free market economy. All financial systems must have some controls to avoid one company or another that creates a vital part taking over. Then you have feudalism. So, these controls have to set certain rules. One of those rules in the United States states that there can be no collusion among competing companies. Also known as "Price Fixing", where companies agree to subvert the market pressure and agree on an artificially inflated price.
Case in point. Last year gas hit $3.00 per gallon. Industry analysts said that to support that price level, if all other things were equal (including profit), oil would have to be at 90.00 per barrel. At the time it was barely 60.00. Yet, all gas companies were charging 3.00 plus per gallon for fuel.
Flash forward. Now oil actually is hovering in the 90.00 per barrel range. And gas? It is at about 3.00 per gallon. Does something seem wrong here?? If the price of a barrel of oil is the driving factor, then last year gas should have been at around 1.98 per gallon, reflecting the 60.00 per barrel price. But it wasn't. And the oil companies that can obviously sell gas at 3.00 per gallon when oil is at 90, were selling it at 3.00 per gallon when oil was at 60. All of them. No maverick at 2.00 per gallon cornering the market. Just uniform pricing and record profit.
Does that sound like collusion? Does to me.
So please, don't quote oil prices to me. Use common sense, look at profit percentages. That's where the problem lies.
Xtian
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Sexual Selection
Sexual Selection
A few weeks ago I wrote a piece on my feelings about the slowdown or halt of human evolution. After giving it some further thought and study, I felt I needed to come back and make an essential clarification. Often I am thinking out a idea in my head that is framed within a certain set of parameters that may not be expressed when I expound on the idea. This was the case in my previous blog.
In that blog I was speaking solely to "Natural Selection Pressure". That is the distilled down version of the more crude idea of "Survival of the Fittest". Not to say that SOTF is in any way incorrect, however, natural selection pressure is so complex that "Fitness" is not to be defined lightly.
Many people are unaware (sadly) that Darwin stated that evolution is driven by two main engines, "Natural Selection" and "Sexual Selection". For many reasons, the first is well known while the second has been rather obscure until lately.
The easiest definition is "Natural Selection" determines "If you survive to sexual maturity". "Sexual Selection" determines if you get to mate or not once you get there.
Due to somewhat prudish overtones in society and science, sexual selection has been given a reserved cubical in the back of the room. Which is strange, since it is responsible for most of the unique characteristics of the human race. Art, Culture, Music, Sports, Etc. all developed by sexual selection. There are no survival advantages to being able to play a guitar, or to using your resources to buy a Ferrari. However, when you bring in the likelihood of mating.....that's another story.
It has been theorized that the development of the human brain was entirely the result of sexual selection. From an evolutionary standpoint our brains got far too large, far too quickly for natural selection. They took a lot more energy than they gave back. Later, they would develop energy saving devices that would offset this, but natural selection isn't an investment banker. It doesn't give something now with hopes of return in the future. Natural selection must have results now. So, that wasn't the reason for our brain development. HOWEVER, sexual selection answers the question nicely. Those with larger brains, given to more creative, entertaining minds..... mated more often and produced more offspring.
So how does this change my earlier ascertains? It doesn't. If anything it makes the prognosis worse. You see where Natural Selection has a blind, relentless drive toward survival, Sexual Selection is very suggestive and given to whim. Sexual selection assumes you have already survived and then makes changes to suit itself. Those changes are not at all tied to the survival of the species and may in fact be detrimental to that survival.
Take for example the Peacock / Peahen relationship. Peahen's sexual selection favored big, brightly colored plumage displays. 3 foot long feathers with blue and bronze coloration. Taking the early, defensive "Eye" pattern of the male's feathers and expanding it to extreme proportions. The bigger, longer tail made the male awkward. It was easier to be caught by predators and overall less likely to survive. If it weren’t for domestication, it probably would have gone extinct. Yet, this was the direction Sexual selection took it. Down a path to extinction.
Think about that next time you are watching some hottie on the "X-Games".
C
A few weeks ago I wrote a piece on my feelings about the slowdown or halt of human evolution. After giving it some further thought and study, I felt I needed to come back and make an essential clarification. Often I am thinking out a idea in my head that is framed within a certain set of parameters that may not be expressed when I expound on the idea. This was the case in my previous blog.
In that blog I was speaking solely to "Natural Selection Pressure". That is the distilled down version of the more crude idea of "Survival of the Fittest". Not to say that SOTF is in any way incorrect, however, natural selection pressure is so complex that "Fitness" is not to be defined lightly.
Many people are unaware (sadly) that Darwin stated that evolution is driven by two main engines, "Natural Selection" and "Sexual Selection". For many reasons, the first is well known while the second has been rather obscure until lately.
The easiest definition is "Natural Selection" determines "If you survive to sexual maturity". "Sexual Selection" determines if you get to mate or not once you get there.
Due to somewhat prudish overtones in society and science, sexual selection has been given a reserved cubical in the back of the room. Which is strange, since it is responsible for most of the unique characteristics of the human race. Art, Culture, Music, Sports, Etc. all developed by sexual selection. There are no survival advantages to being able to play a guitar, or to using your resources to buy a Ferrari. However, when you bring in the likelihood of mating.....that's another story.
It has been theorized that the development of the human brain was entirely the result of sexual selection. From an evolutionary standpoint our brains got far too large, far too quickly for natural selection. They took a lot more energy than they gave back. Later, they would develop energy saving devices that would offset this, but natural selection isn't an investment banker. It doesn't give something now with hopes of return in the future. Natural selection must have results now. So, that wasn't the reason for our brain development. HOWEVER, sexual selection answers the question nicely. Those with larger brains, given to more creative, entertaining minds..... mated more often and produced more offspring.
So how does this change my earlier ascertains? It doesn't. If anything it makes the prognosis worse. You see where Natural Selection has a blind, relentless drive toward survival, Sexual Selection is very suggestive and given to whim. Sexual selection assumes you have already survived and then makes changes to suit itself. Those changes are not at all tied to the survival of the species and may in fact be detrimental to that survival.
Take for example the Peacock / Peahen relationship. Peahen's sexual selection favored big, brightly colored plumage displays. 3 foot long feathers with blue and bronze coloration. Taking the early, defensive "Eye" pattern of the male's feathers and expanding it to extreme proportions. The bigger, longer tail made the male awkward. It was easier to be caught by predators and overall less likely to survive. If it weren’t for domestication, it probably would have gone extinct. Yet, this was the direction Sexual selection took it. Down a path to extinction.
Think about that next time you are watching some hottie on the "X-Games".
C
Monday, November 12, 2007
The awkward position of humans
Those who have read my previous writings know that I am a firm believer in the natural order of the universe. Things happen by cause and effect, selection pressure, environmental occurrence. Not by magic fairy dust, happy thoughts, or any other form of myth. (including yours).
I am currently struggling with being human. Ok, I know I AM human and can’t change that. But as a human, I am the only top level predator that is subject to “Memes” and as such I am the top level predator that is in the most danger! (except for the ones humans endanger by insane actions, caused by Memes of course).
I guess my biggest fear is that so many humans are so unaware of their part in the grand scheme of things. Through any number of mythologies, they have conveniently abdicated their responsibility, and thus moved on, gleefully destroying and maiming.
Do I think humans will destroy the earth? No, probably not. Do I think we will extinct ourselves through our own actions? Probably.
Other creatures understand the world around them on a fundamental level. Or rather, they live, not possessing the need for “Understanding”.
Killer whales eat, swim, reproduce. That’s it. Nothing eats them. They live, do their thing, and die. They have complex hunting strategies, they mate, they produce baby killer whales, they hunt until they are too old to survive, and then they return to the oneness of the universe.
I don’t do that. I developed a neo-cortex apparently and everything went down hill from there. According to Douglas Adams, the three stages of civilization are “ How can we eat, Why do we eat, and Where shall we do lunch”. Once we moved past the “How” things started to get a little fuzzy.
The “Why” shouldn’t be the major question that it has become. We eat so that we don’t starve and die. Let me try to address some of the “Meme” based issues that come out of this questions-
Should we eat to fulfill our souls? No, you should eat so you don’t die.
Does the universe want me to eat? The universe doesn’t care.
Does God want me to eat? Which god do you mean?
I mean “the one god”. Ok there are several 100 “One gods” you have to be more specific than that.
Can I eat anything? Sure, but different things come with different consequences.
Ok, that’s a few of them.
But, that isn’t the issue…. I am bouncing a bit far-a-field here. But hang with me, it gets better.
I guess at this point I have to be sure that everyone understands “Memes”. The dictionary defines a Meme at-
a cultural unit (an idea or value or pattern of behavior) that is passed from one person to another by non-genetic means (as by imitation); "memes are the cultural counterpart of genes"
Sooooooooooo, what does that mean? Well, a Meme grows and is shaped by the same method a creature is. The parts of a meme that strengthen it, hang on and the parts that weaken it are pared away by selection pressure. Ok, fine. What’s the problem?
The problem is that the meme projects into the extended phenotype in a way that nothing else does. Bear in mind that the meme doesn’t have to be beneficial to the host (human), it is only in it for its own survival.
To understand the depth of this effect we have to take a look at one of the previously ok parts of evolution that has become problematic with humans. One of the core elements is that to be “Successful”, a creature only needs to live long enough to reproduce and nurse its young to an age where it can survive. That’s it. That defines ultimate evolutionary success. ( in a rudimentary way, but it does it).
If we are talking about a deer, we don’t have a problem. Say an idiot deer is born. Not bad enough to starve to death, but pretty dumb. It runs into trees a lot. But it mates, reproduces, stands still long enough or is unconscious from running into trees long enough for the fawn to reach self-sufficient age. Then it runs off a cliff, leaving an idiot fawn to repeat the process. (somewhere down the line one of the fawns with run off the cliff before reproducing, ending the cycle). But here is the rub. In this example, the worst thing that will happen is you will be left with some dented trees and a puddle at the bottom of a cliff that raccoons and vultures will enjoy.
In humans, we not only reproduce, but we carry memes, just like rats carried fleas with the plague. When an idiot human reproduces, it not only sends on the idiot gene, it sends along all the memes that go with it. And as we discovered before, memes have far-reaching effects in the extended phenotype. So, instead of dented trees, you get people who blindly support organizations who are raping and killing the planet, because their memes tell them they are morally obligated to do so. And since other memes cause humans to take extraordinary measures to keep the idiot humans from being weeded out by selection pressure, the gene travels farther and faster than it ever could in nature.
Add to that the fact that the idiot gene doesn’t know not to reproduce beyond its means to support its young…..BUT, the memes step in and make sure the young survive…………
I don’t mean to sound harsh here, but the bottom line is we are heading for a future that will closely resemble Mike Judge’s “Idiocracy” in short order. As Green Day said so eloquently, “I’ve been around the world and found that only stupid people are breeding”.
So my dilemma is, how do we fix it? Can we fix it? And if not, how do I keep the idiots out of my way on a more regular basis?
I am currently struggling with being human. Ok, I know I AM human and can’t change that. But as a human, I am the only top level predator that is subject to “Memes” and as such I am the top level predator that is in the most danger! (except for the ones humans endanger by insane actions, caused by Memes of course).
I guess my biggest fear is that so many humans are so unaware of their part in the grand scheme of things. Through any number of mythologies, they have conveniently abdicated their responsibility, and thus moved on, gleefully destroying and maiming.
Do I think humans will destroy the earth? No, probably not. Do I think we will extinct ourselves through our own actions? Probably.
Other creatures understand the world around them on a fundamental level. Or rather, they live, not possessing the need for “Understanding”.
Killer whales eat, swim, reproduce. That’s it. Nothing eats them. They live, do their thing, and die. They have complex hunting strategies, they mate, they produce baby killer whales, they hunt until they are too old to survive, and then they return to the oneness of the universe.
I don’t do that. I developed a neo-cortex apparently and everything went down hill from there. According to Douglas Adams, the three stages of civilization are “ How can we eat, Why do we eat, and Where shall we do lunch”. Once we moved past the “How” things started to get a little fuzzy.
The “Why” shouldn’t be the major question that it has become. We eat so that we don’t starve and die. Let me try to address some of the “Meme” based issues that come out of this questions-
Should we eat to fulfill our souls? No, you should eat so you don’t die.
Does the universe want me to eat? The universe doesn’t care.
Does God want me to eat? Which god do you mean?
I mean “the one god”. Ok there are several 100 “One gods” you have to be more specific than that.
Can I eat anything? Sure, but different things come with different consequences.
Ok, that’s a few of them.
But, that isn’t the issue…. I am bouncing a bit far-a-field here. But hang with me, it gets better.
I guess at this point I have to be sure that everyone understands “Memes”. The dictionary defines a Meme at-
a cultural unit (an idea or value or pattern of behavior) that is passed from one person to another by non-genetic means (as by imitation); "memes are the cultural counterpart of genes"
Sooooooooooo, what does that mean? Well, a Meme grows and is shaped by the same method a creature is. The parts of a meme that strengthen it, hang on and the parts that weaken it are pared away by selection pressure. Ok, fine. What’s the problem?
The problem is that the meme projects into the extended phenotype in a way that nothing else does. Bear in mind that the meme doesn’t have to be beneficial to the host (human), it is only in it for its own survival.
To understand the depth of this effect we have to take a look at one of the previously ok parts of evolution that has become problematic with humans. One of the core elements is that to be “Successful”, a creature only needs to live long enough to reproduce and nurse its young to an age where it can survive. That’s it. That defines ultimate evolutionary success. ( in a rudimentary way, but it does it).
If we are talking about a deer, we don’t have a problem. Say an idiot deer is born. Not bad enough to starve to death, but pretty dumb. It runs into trees a lot. But it mates, reproduces, stands still long enough or is unconscious from running into trees long enough for the fawn to reach self-sufficient age. Then it runs off a cliff, leaving an idiot fawn to repeat the process. (somewhere down the line one of the fawns with run off the cliff before reproducing, ending the cycle). But here is the rub. In this example, the worst thing that will happen is you will be left with some dented trees and a puddle at the bottom of a cliff that raccoons and vultures will enjoy.
In humans, we not only reproduce, but we carry memes, just like rats carried fleas with the plague. When an idiot human reproduces, it not only sends on the idiot gene, it sends along all the memes that go with it. And as we discovered before, memes have far-reaching effects in the extended phenotype. So, instead of dented trees, you get people who blindly support organizations who are raping and killing the planet, because their memes tell them they are morally obligated to do so. And since other memes cause humans to take extraordinary measures to keep the idiot humans from being weeded out by selection pressure, the gene travels farther and faster than it ever could in nature.
Add to that the fact that the idiot gene doesn’t know not to reproduce beyond its means to support its young…..BUT, the memes step in and make sure the young survive…………
I don’t mean to sound harsh here, but the bottom line is we are heading for a future that will closely resemble Mike Judge’s “Idiocracy” in short order. As Green Day said so eloquently, “I’ve been around the world and found that only stupid people are breeding”.
So my dilemma is, how do we fix it? Can we fix it? And if not, how do I keep the idiots out of my way on a more regular basis?
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
The Beauty of Selection Pressure
The Beauty of Selection Pressure.
I received several comments on my statement that the crafting work of selection pressure was a beautiful thing. I thought, perhaps I should expound on this issue.
I am an actor / director. I love art and beauty. Art and beauty is often portrayed as being in stark contrast to science, but for me, it isn’t the case.
I live in the Texas Hill Country, about 100 miles northwest of Austin. Ahhhhh, Austin, a shining patch of gleaming blue in a big red state…… But that is an issue for another time. We are talking about science, art and beauty. When I walk through the woods behind my house, I am taken with the beauty of the trees, the animals, the earth as it presents itself to me….. The most beautiful part, is how selection pressure has crafted each element to be the best it can be for the environment. Except for me of course. To quote Bill Hicks, humans are a virus in shoes. I wear size 12 -½.. (see my blog “has evolution stopped for humans”)
To understand selection pressure, you first need to understand fidelity in reproduction, or the lack thereof. Each time biological reproduction happens, there is a recombination of DNA. Doesn’t matter if it is a tree, a moose or Tommy Johnson, it was created by combining DNA. (there are a few species that reproduce from asexual means, but they are essentially clones and are a different class that doesn’t evolve, so they aren’t relevant to the discussion) So back to fidelity. Each time a copy is made, there is the opportunity for mutation. One particle hops over another, and the copy…….Changes.
I forget the exact statistic, but something like 97 percent of these mutations are fatal, pre-birth. Of the ones that survive, many are insignificant in the large scheme of things. That is to say, they have no effect on selection pressure because they provide no advantage or disadvantage. But the few that do….. WOW, they change everything.
I am trying not to ramble here, but I have to cover many diverse points in order to pull this into a cohesive statement. Another unavoidable factor is time. Evolution takes time more than anything else. Many mutations will happen, some will happen again, and over time, the ones that provide an advantage will be reinforced. When you look at the several billion years that the earth as existed and you see how there is plenty of time for the process to work.
So most mutations are fatal, some do nothing, and some provide an advantage, be it large or small. Imagine if you will, the first hominid to walk erect. A mutation changed his/her spine, hips, etc. and suddenly a new form of locomotion was born. This new creature was the top of the chain. He went on the hunt and was never eaten (I don‘t have to outrun the saber tooth, I just have to outrun you…) . He could reach the high branches. Those who wanted to reproduce flocked to this one, as he/she had the strength and the resources to produce many healthy offspring that lived to reproduction age themselves. WHAM, we have evolution at play.
Creatures are crafted by the environment around them, to fit as well as is possible. Only when the environment changes at a rate beyond the optimum reproduction rate do problems happen, usually resulting in extinctions. Sometimes this happens from a natural event, other times, more recently, it happens from an artificial event. (See those who believe in “Dominionism” for details on this.)
Occasionally there is an environmental change that drops an ill or well suited entity into the mix, but that is a rare condition called environmental displacement and is generally the result of a catastrophic weather event.
In most cases, the environment crafts the species. That’s what is so beautiful. Small subtle changes, refined over long periods of time, bring us miraculous creatures. Each minor mutation, each small mistake in fidelity, has the opportunity to craft the species in a new direction. So after billions of years of the earth’s existence we have tigers who attack with brutal quickness, we have chameleons who change pigment to match their environment. We have giraffes, polar bears, kangaroos, and alligator snapping turtles (including the one who lives in my office, his name is Spike). All uniquely suited to their environment, crafted by selection pressure.
I have been told that this scientific explanation takes the wonder out of nature. I am baffled by this. To me, it is wonder and majesty. To see all of this at work. This is the art and beauty I see in nature.
I received several comments on my statement that the crafting work of selection pressure was a beautiful thing. I thought, perhaps I should expound on this issue.
I am an actor / director. I love art and beauty. Art and beauty is often portrayed as being in stark contrast to science, but for me, it isn’t the case.
I live in the Texas Hill Country, about 100 miles northwest of Austin. Ahhhhh, Austin, a shining patch of gleaming blue in a big red state…… But that is an issue for another time. We are talking about science, art and beauty. When I walk through the woods behind my house, I am taken with the beauty of the trees, the animals, the earth as it presents itself to me….. The most beautiful part, is how selection pressure has crafted each element to be the best it can be for the environment. Except for me of course. To quote Bill Hicks, humans are a virus in shoes. I wear size 12 -½.. (see my blog “has evolution stopped for humans”)
To understand selection pressure, you first need to understand fidelity in reproduction, or the lack thereof. Each time biological reproduction happens, there is a recombination of DNA. Doesn’t matter if it is a tree, a moose or Tommy Johnson, it was created by combining DNA. (there are a few species that reproduce from asexual means, but they are essentially clones and are a different class that doesn’t evolve, so they aren’t relevant to the discussion) So back to fidelity. Each time a copy is made, there is the opportunity for mutation. One particle hops over another, and the copy…….Changes.
I forget the exact statistic, but something like 97 percent of these mutations are fatal, pre-birth. Of the ones that survive, many are insignificant in the large scheme of things. That is to say, they have no effect on selection pressure because they provide no advantage or disadvantage. But the few that do….. WOW, they change everything.
I am trying not to ramble here, but I have to cover many diverse points in order to pull this into a cohesive statement. Another unavoidable factor is time. Evolution takes time more than anything else. Many mutations will happen, some will happen again, and over time, the ones that provide an advantage will be reinforced. When you look at the several billion years that the earth as existed and you see how there is plenty of time for the process to work.
So most mutations are fatal, some do nothing, and some provide an advantage, be it large or small. Imagine if you will, the first hominid to walk erect. A mutation changed his/her spine, hips, etc. and suddenly a new form of locomotion was born. This new creature was the top of the chain. He went on the hunt and was never eaten (I don‘t have to outrun the saber tooth, I just have to outrun you…) . He could reach the high branches. Those who wanted to reproduce flocked to this one, as he/she had the strength and the resources to produce many healthy offspring that lived to reproduction age themselves. WHAM, we have evolution at play.
Creatures are crafted by the environment around them, to fit as well as is possible. Only when the environment changes at a rate beyond the optimum reproduction rate do problems happen, usually resulting in extinctions. Sometimes this happens from a natural event, other times, more recently, it happens from an artificial event. (See those who believe in “Dominionism” for details on this.)
Occasionally there is an environmental change that drops an ill or well suited entity into the mix, but that is a rare condition called environmental displacement and is generally the result of a catastrophic weather event.
In most cases, the environment crafts the species. That’s what is so beautiful. Small subtle changes, refined over long periods of time, bring us miraculous creatures. Each minor mutation, each small mistake in fidelity, has the opportunity to craft the species in a new direction. So after billions of years of the earth’s existence we have tigers who attack with brutal quickness, we have chameleons who change pigment to match their environment. We have giraffes, polar bears, kangaroos, and alligator snapping turtles (including the one who lives in my office, his name is Spike). All uniquely suited to their environment, crafted by selection pressure.
I have been told that this scientific explanation takes the wonder out of nature. I am baffled by this. To me, it is wonder and majesty. To see all of this at work. This is the art and beauty I see in nature.
WGA Strike Is Inspiring
As the WGA strike enters its third day, I am inspired by the solidarity of the guild members. SAG members are also walking the picket lines causing many series to go dark sooner than expected. In an additional unexpected turn, many executive producers have also refused to cross picket lines calling a halt to even more shows.
This has caused a sharp backlash from many advertisers. Promotion of new films has decreased substantially as advertisers decline spending their money on full rate ads on shows that are suddenly in reruns.
It is a shame that unions and guilds got such a bad reputation through the corruption scandals that happened last century. In many industries these organizations are essential for the safety and fair treatment of workers. No where is this more true than in the entertainment business.
While top level stars make massive paychecks, that represents a tiny portion of the professional actors working today. The entertainment industry is one of the unique businesses where people can be convinced to work for nothing by dangling the carrot of being discovered. There are many independent films where the producers have made millions and the actors/crew have never received a dime. Nor were they “Discovered”. Nor were they allowed to work on the producer’s next big budget union film. They had simply donated their time, work and identity to make money for someone who would give them nothing in return.
There are real issues on the table regarding residuals, new media, etc. that must be hammered out. I am very proud that my guild, SAG, is supporting the WGA.
Other unions could learn a lot from the solidarity shown here. Working people, well organized, can make a substantial difference. This is something too many have forgotten.
This has caused a sharp backlash from many advertisers. Promotion of new films has decreased substantially as advertisers decline spending their money on full rate ads on shows that are suddenly in reruns.
It is a shame that unions and guilds got such a bad reputation through the corruption scandals that happened last century. In many industries these organizations are essential for the safety and fair treatment of workers. No where is this more true than in the entertainment business.
While top level stars make massive paychecks, that represents a tiny portion of the professional actors working today. The entertainment industry is one of the unique businesses where people can be convinced to work for nothing by dangling the carrot of being discovered. There are many independent films where the producers have made millions and the actors/crew have never received a dime. Nor were they “Discovered”. Nor were they allowed to work on the producer’s next big budget union film. They had simply donated their time, work and identity to make money for someone who would give them nothing in return.
There are real issues on the table regarding residuals, new media, etc. that must be hammered out. I am very proud that my guild, SAG, is supporting the WGA.
Other unions could learn a lot from the solidarity shown here. Working people, well organized, can make a substantial difference. This is something too many have forgotten.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
