I understand that the position I've taken in this thread probably
seems 'extreme' to most folks - but it's not.
Consider prions, for instance - relatively-small scraps of protein,
but look at what they do: survive digestive processes, travel in the
bloodstream. cross the blood-brain-barrier, and, then, literally take
over control of the nervous system [Kuru, C-J in Humans, 'mad-cow
disease' in animals].
So it's not even a 'stretch' to see that 'little stuff' can. and in
fact does, matter in big ways.
Am I the 'bad-guy' [again] for pointing out that, when it's
juxtaposed with the eons-long testing within evolutionary dynamics,
there're relatively =no= controls with respect to
It's 'hilarious' - the discoverer of the prion connection faced the
same sort of 'knee-jerk' 'criticism', but his hypothesis was Correct
all along - how many thousands of Lives has he, through his work, and
his persistence in the face of 'knee-jerk' criticism, saved?
Gotta be a lot of thousands.
Yet, on top of his work, he had to endure the 'bashing' of
'knees-jerking' [had to endure the ramifications of
'blindly'-automated TD E/I-minimization with respect to the short
term TD E/I(up) that his work induced within 'the system'.
It's =always= this way. One'd think folks'd learn from the shear
repetitiveness of it :-]
K. P. Collins
"KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message
news:8S%na.67615$ja4.4459924 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| While I'm doing 'difficult' stuff, here's a little more...
|| To be thorough, it's necessary to wstablish a =detailed= History
| cross-correlates any instance of a 'new virus', such as the mutated
| virus that's been deemed responsible for SARS, and
| genetically-engineered stuff, including foodstuffs.
|| I've discussed, in long-former posts, the underpinning rationale
| doing such, reiterating the main thing recently - evolutionary
| dynamics occur in a way that's Determined by WDB2T - introducing
| modified 3-D energy-gradients into the evolutionary mix can,
| potentially, alter evolutions relationship with WDB2T in
| unanticipated ways.
|| There has to be an explanation for the appearances of both HIV and
| SARS. Maybe that 'explanation' is just that the molecular
| that enables the recognition that 'new viruses' have, in fact,
| up were not formerly available, and that it's not actually anything
|| But that position does not explain the deadliness of HIV and SARS,
| which is easily recognized, and which, if this sort of thing 'has
| been happening all along, but gone unrecognized', such still
| explain the easily-observed 'new' deadliness of these 'new
|| So thoroughness with respect to such deadly stuff requires the
| establishment of Histories that cross-correlate the 'new viruses'
| genetically-engineered stuff, looking for 'coincidences'.
|| The larger rationale is as I've discussed in long-former msgs -
| evolutionary dynamics occur over eons during which everything is
| Tested, flushed-clean, etc., before it can go forward
|| But genetic-engineered stuff is inherently 'free' of such eons-long
|| The hypothesis that has to be explored is, "Are there any 'time'
| coincidences between the arrivals of these 'new viruses' and the
| loosing of bio-engineered stuff within the environments in which
| 'new viruses' arise?"
|| It's just common sense to leave no stones unturned when matters
|| The thought is that it might be that a bio-engineered thing can
| a non-evolutionarily-compatible 3-D energy-gradient within
| eons-tested, Life, and that such triggers accelerated viral
|| I see nothing, in principle, that 'outlaws' this possibility.
|| [The same thing can, of course, result from relatively-new
| chemofactors, or even through the augmenting degree of
| inter-genetic-pool mixing that derives in 'globalization'. All such
| factors need to be examined in detailed ways. This sort of thing
| be implemented for the long term via computerized methods which, as
| the data builds will, itself, become a Standardized way of doing
| Biology in which questions of evolutionary relavance gradually
| increasingly refined, analyzed, and reified.]
|| It's unacceptable to just say, "Of course, our fiddling with the
| stuff of evolution's eons of testing is safe."
|| The question is, "of course", entirely open.
|| K. P. Collins