MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Crying Wolf (Life Sciences)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 33, 34, 35 ... 54, 55, 56  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Oh. But surely this practice is so widespread in nature that it cannot be taken as diagnostic? Or is is really so widespread in nature, see my wildebeest strictures? Could some kind soul provide a list of animals (including birds) that do the hierarchical thing but are unquestionably uninvolved with Man.

PS Am I alone in consistently missing Ishmael's good points?
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Something else to while away your winter nights. I want to make the case that domesticates and ex-domesticates have specialist names for their young eg owls/ owlet whereas non-d's just have generative names eg robins/ robin chicks. Get to it.
Send private message
berniegreen



View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
Yep, plenty. All over France and Italy that I know of personally and pretty prolific in Russia, Poland and other bits of Eastern Europe.

Bernie, always first ask yourself, "Does the other geezer know this, and if he obviously does, isn't it likely that I've missed the point somewhere along the line." All these populations are closely associated with hunting, ferality and human activity in general. We just don't know whether they are truly naturally wild. See also horses and the European forests.
There is also a second message here. Ask yourself what you REALLY mean before you say it.
Send private message Send e-mail
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Here is my entry for 'smallness', the first of the ten 'signals-of-domestication'.

1. Smallness. The domesticated version is smaller than the wild version even if, later, the domesticated version is bred to be larger than the wild original. The classic example would be the cow and the auroch (assuming that was the original domestication, which is not certain). Perhaps the largest cow (more strictly bull) still has not acquired the stature of the auroch but in the case of the dog and the wolf (again not a certain jump) the Irish Wolfhound is now bigger than any wolf. Why the domesticate is smaller is not known, perhaps it has something to do with breeding in gentleness or, more likely, prolonging the juvenile stage but the fact of it is sufficiently well attested to adopt this as a sign of domestication.

Unfortunately it is also the case that nature alters the size of species so, whether examining the fossil record or living species, it is not possible to definitively assign the hand of man as against the hand of nature. Of course we are only dealing with the last 50,000 years so by definition all step changes will be 'sudden' by the standards of evolutionary biology, and therefore suspect. Unfortunately the last 50,000 years have also seen massive climate change, a clear impetus to size change, and in any case human behaviour other than domestication may have the same effect. Nonetheless any sudden downsizing occurring in any given species in the last 50,000 years is at least prime facie evidence of domestication.
Send private message
berniegreen



View user's profile
Reply with quote

By an amazing coincidence, last night our TV showed the BBC documentary "The Secret Life of the Dog" which contained a section on the Russian Silver Fox breeding experiment. By selecting for tameness/gentleness only, within three generations they had bred and stabilised a domesticated animal, effectively turning foxes into "dogs". It appears that aggression and/or its lack is genetically keyed and also related to some other characteristics.

The selection for tameness also produced changes in some physical characteristics - curly tails, fur colour, marking pattern, floppy ears - most frequently signs of the juvenile rather than the mature animal. Size changes however were not a by-product.

Thus it would appear that the only experimental evidence that we have on this subject runs counter to your thesis. However that is not to say that a size change could not emerge, as you suggest, in subsequent generations.
Send private message Send e-mail
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

This is rather old hat. The Russians have been trying to 'domesticate' the silver fox since the middle of the last century (at least since then, they are not very forthcoming on the fur trade in general, read Gorky Park). Of course they can breed in various characteristics into caged animals, we have been doing that for vivisectional purposes for a great deal longer. But neither us nor them have produced a domesticated animal in any real sense. Fruit fly pet, anybody?
Send private message
DPCrisp


In: Bedfordshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

By an amazing coincidence, last night our TV showed the BBC documentary "The Secret Life of the Dog" which contained a section on the Russian Silver Fox breeding experiment.

See pages 21 and 29 of this thread, Bernie.
Send private message
Hatty
Site Admin

In: Berkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

How long would trained behaviour last, assuming it had taken place? A clip on last night's Rude Tube showed a pod of killer whales, under observation by Norwegian scientists, chasing (rounding up?) a lone penguin which was headed straight at the scientists' dinghy. It hopped aboard much to their delight and I couldn't help thinking it wasn't an accident.
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Fascinating.

The key here would be that it is not trained behavior but inbred behavior.
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
But neither us nor them have produced a domesticated animal in any real sense. Fruit fly pet, anybody?


Do you mean that we have been unable to produce any sort of domesticated animal from a wild variety -- ever? How do we define "domesticated"?
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Tut, tut, Ishmael. You above all should remember that a basic AE adage is "Never begin with a definition, finish with one." I have been observing this principle with great success ever since the Great Domestication Debate started (by me, let us not forget!). By not bothering with a formal definition I have gradually learned that there is no such thing as domestication but you know it when you see it.

However to introduce some formality, have a look at the table here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_domesticated_animals
and if you have the technical means reproduce it here and we can kick it about a bit.

To demonstrate how non-definition works in practice, here's the last paragraph of my disquisition on the barn owl, written yesterday

So....how does it add up? To be perfectly honest it doesn't matter much either way. After all, just putting up nestboxes in the barn to attract owls would have much the same effect and, for all we know, putting up nestboxes for a few hundred years might very well lead to a new species or subspecies of owl simply by the de facto creation of a new eco-niche. And in any case we know that owls can and have been 'domesticated' at least in the sense that we have historical records of falconers using owls. Nonetheless the exercise has been worthwhile in demonstrating, albeit without any finality, that the barn owl has some unusual characteristics that may point to a previously unknown relationship to man. Let us turn to another example which has rather wider implications in human history..

If I had started even thinking about what domestication actually is I would still be reading orthodox accounts of it. And of course being no further forward than orthodoxy.
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
If I had started even thinking about what domestication actually is I would still be reading orthodox accounts of it. And of course being no further forward than orthodoxy.


That's what is killing my work!

I must try to understand your method.
Send private message
berniegreen



View user's profile
Reply with quote

Apologies to all for thoughtlessly coming in on the end of this thread. It looks fun. I will go back and read it properly.
Send private message Send e-mail
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Every time I look something conventional up on Wiki I die a little. But ask Hatty about her experiences with Wiki regarding, for instance, Megalithic saints ie where there is no prevailing orthodoxy. She is now easily the world authority. Though of course that may turn out to be an Italian war hero.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

PS You'll remember that I had a major British publisher slavering over some chapters on my Megalithic theories....well, they asked for a synopsis of the rest of the book and I foolishly told the truth. Result: Dear Mr Harper, after discussions with our marketing department we feel unable to etc etc. As a historical note because it may never see the light of day, here is the synopsis of the book the world may never see.
-------------------------------------------------

Chapter One The Basic Building Blocks of the System

This will be a slightly rejigged version of the first section of Chapter One already provided


Chapter Two The Trunk System and the Michael Line

This will be a slightly rejigged version of the first section of Chapter Two already provided


Chapter Three The International Dimension

How domestic British transport arrangements were connected to the outside world. It is included here in its entirety to complete the basic picture of the Megalithic System.


Chapter Four How The System Was Paid For

Problems of paying for any large scale project in a cash-free economy with a weak central government
Megalithic System based on tolls, with salt acting as the basic medium of payment and exchange
Transport of bulk but high-value goods the mainstay eg copper, tin, flint axes -- later on iron, corn, wine
But also high value, scarce commodities eg medicines, drugs, processed alcohol, jewellery, weapons.
Discussion of importance of certain plants that do not figure now eg oak apples, mistletoe, blue lotus, fly agaric, sage, wormwood, plants for making carbon steel
Importance of control of water sources, wells, chalybeate springs, winterbournes, leats
Provision of capital intensive projects at water crossings eg water mills, fish weirs, ferries, eyots, etc
Control of wood sources; oak, alder, charcoal, metal smelting


Chapter Five Animal Domestication for Megalithic Purposes

Early domestication of 'farmyard' animals -- still with us today
Why no animals have been domesticated since then.
Megalithic domestication of 'special purpose' animals -- mainly now gone feral and not recognised as ex-domesticates
How to recognise them: familiarity with humans, albinisim, miniaturised morphology, peculiar ethology
The corvidae -- and the way each species was used for a particular Megalithic purpose
Rooks as warning devices
Magpies for collecting tolls
Choughs for maritime patrolling
Crows for direction-finding
Jackdaws as talking signposts
Rooks for timekeeping
Raven/swan/peacock, the three stages of alchemy
Deer family
Water fowl
Mustelidae: ermine, ferrets, otters
Warrening: conies, hares, rabbits
Dartmoor ponies


Chapter Six Megalithic Terraforming

Examples of and reasons for various Megalithic landforms, not necessarily recognised as such:
Chesil beach
Chalk downlands
Isle of Wight
Logan stones
Tors
White horse hills
Silbury Hill
Same height hills: Milk Hill & Tan Hill, Hambledon Hill & Hod Hill, Gog & Magog range
Levelled plateaux: Salisbury Plain, Rombalds Moor, Therfield Heath
Michael Line extensions: Somerset Levels, Norfolk Broads
Hillforts, ridgeways, green lanes, 'Roman' roads
The 'badlands' of southern England, moors generally seen as Megalithic
Isle of Thanet, Margate grotto and identification with Avebury


Chapter Seven Festivals, Folk survivals etc

Problems of writing Megalithic history when no written records exist:
May 1st being the day the dawn sun shines up the Michael Line
Worldwide importance of May 1st (Beltane)
Padstow hobby-horse, Minehead and other May 1st festivals
Samhain (Hallowe'en) as the reverse of Beltane
Bonfire Night and the Guide of Forks ie Hermes, Guido Fawkes
Puck, Robin Goodfellow, Herne the Hunter
Pixie Day, Ottery St Mary
Maypoles
Mazes, the Troy Game
Beating the bounds
Original purpose of wishing wells
Decorating trees
Battle of the flowers


Chapter Eight 'Carthage' versus 'Rome'

The gradual switch from the pure Megalithic System to the Hermetic System and the development of Phoenician trade with Cornwall. 'Phoenician' place names in Cornwall
London as New Troy (Trinovantes); Paris, Yorkshire
Struggle for control of long distance trade and access to minerals between the Maritime & Phonetic powers on one hand and the Terrestrial & Alphabetic powers on the other:
Phoenicians versus Hebrews
Trojans versus Greeks
Etruscans versus Romans
Greeks & Romans versus Carthaginians
Romans versus Druids


Chapter Nine After Rome

The hermits and the monasteries
Survival of Megalithia in Ireland and its subsequent revival after the fall of Roman Empire in the West.
Celtic Christianity and the Megalithic Saints
Lug, Hermes, Michael
The 'dragon' saints: Michael, George, Margaret, James, Millan, sons of Zebedee
The 'pagan' Saints: Denis (Dionysus), Catharine (Hecate), Helen (Ellen of the Ways)
The 'sea' saints: Samson, Fermin, Pelagius
The 'travel' saints: Goar, Gatien
Continental equivalents of the Megalithic saints: Rombald, John the Baptist, Mary Magdalen
Lighthouse/ childbirth saints: Margaret, Catherine, Martha


Chapter Ten The Modern Megalithics

The Normans
Aquitaine and England, troubadours and Grail Romances
The Gothic cathedrals, masons and Green Men
Knights Templars
Cistercians
Universities, canon law
Guelphs versus Ghibellines
Neo-Platonists
Alchemists
Rosicrucian Enlightenment
Scientific Revolution
------------------------------------------------
The Sales Dept had a point....who'd be interested in that lot? Except maybe us lot.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 33, 34, 35 ... 54, 55, 56  Next

Jump to:  
Page 34 of 56

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group