THE THREAD!!!

[Chickenboy]

Per-the canary islands are nominally Spanish, right?  Yet, the vast majority of their tourist trade is from all over Europe, right?  What's the default lingua franca there?  How did the bellhop greet you before you said a thing?

[Grollub]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Per, I'm trying to decide if I dislike you versus Kwik E Mart more these days...it's a very tough choice. [:'(] [;)]

[8D][:D]

[Grollub]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
Per-the canary islands are nominally Spanish, right? 

Right.

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
Yet, the vast majority of their tourist trade is from all over Europe, right? 

Right.

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
What's the default lingua franca there? 

Spanish.

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
How did the bellhop greet you before you said a thing?

Buenas Noches, Senor.

[:'(]

[Chickenboy]

You look about as Spanish as I do, mate. [:D]

My experience with some tourist-heavy places with multinational patrons is that they will default to what you 'appear' to be. In my case, with 'gringo' tattooed on my cabeza, they usually try American English ([:'(] take that Limeys) first as a default.

I'll usually answer them exclusively in Colombian / Mexican Spanish. [:D]

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

Zssssssssss time... [>:][>:][>:]


Leo "Apollo11"

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso
So, are you trying to say that the FEWER genes a species has the more advanced it is? That would put chickens ahead of us... and make Chickenboy possibly the most advanced person here (evolutionarily speaking...) [X(] [:D]

And that would also imply E. coli and the influenza virus have us beat by a large margin (4,169 and 11 genes, respectively). [;)]

While I concur with rtrapasso's conclusion about my advanced hybrid chicken/human persona (evolutionary speaking of course) [:'(], "advanced" is a very subjective term. The number of genes in a given organism is a non-correlate to how advanced an organism is. There's lots of other schemata for determining how 'advanced' an organism is relative to others.

Er... i would hope it was pretty obvious (from the examples given) that by most standard the number of genes doesn't have much to do with how "advanced" a species is. [;)]

As for cats and where they developed: i think it is a logical trap to think that because a species has the most genetic diversity in a particular location that it is then the place where they developed (although of course it MIGHT be true).

For instance, lets say cats originated in Libya (in a thought experiment) and that they migrated along the coast of Africa into the Middle East and Turkey. Then the ocean levels change and the Middle East population is cut off from the original Libyan population. The Mid-East population would tend to spread and proliferate genetic diversity as they encounter different climates, but in this though experiment, the Libyan population is wiped out (or at reduced to very small numbers) by a cat virus combined with natural disaster. Actually, this is what has recently happened to the cheetah: it has very narrow genetic diversity.

Genetic testing would say "there is more genetic diversity in the Mid-East/Turkey, therefore that is where cats originated", however, in this thought experiment that is not the case.

Also, we can say that the ancestral cat that gave rise to most of the current cat species was probably from an arid climate, we don't know where the current species Felis catus developed based on (say) kidney structure. Despite cats living for tens of thousands of years (or more) in relatively wet climates (jungles, etc.), afaik, they haven't tended to lose their relatively efficient kidney function.

It would seem to have a survival advantage to be able to drink brackish water if your kidney function is able to hold up until you are able to breed, which seems to be the case with cats. A large percentage of cats i've known tend to go from kidney failure [:(]- but only after they've had a successful reproductive life. [:)]

[Chickenboy]

Hey Leo-

I wanted to say 'thanks' for the video / news pieces you post. Usually, those are excellent quality or at least very interesting. The video of the tsunami from a couple days ago was phenomenally sobering. The 'big NASA announcement' from a couple months ago sparked a furious debate around my family and coworkers about what it was going to be. So, thanks. [:)]

[Grollub]

Good night friends [>:]

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso
Er... i would hope it was pretty obvious (from the examples given) that by most standard the number of genes doesn't have much to do with how "advanced" a species is.

Yes, it was pretty obvious. With the exception of myself, as I indicated. [:'(]

I concur about your thoughts on diversity does not equal inception / initial introduction. So many factors influence what genetic phenotypes predominate in a given area over long stretches of evolutionary time. I haven't done an anatomic comparison between F. silvestris or Panthera spp. to juxtapose their renal physiology versus today's F. catus (and presumed geographical origins), but my loose understanding is that they're pretty darn similar.

Unless you knew most pre-Felis domesticus or Felis silvestris catus or Felis catus or Hotrodicus tidbiticus (oops-the latter was Roadrunner taxonomy...), your experiences with modern cats and renal disease is likely unrelated to their evolutionary renal physiologic function so much as a hazards associated with domestication and aging.

To whit: because you probably haven't known many feral Felis catus animals or what caused their demise at what age, your sampling from personal experience is biased and not reflective of the species on the whole. Most cats (by species number) are not domesticated in the behavioral sense. For them, a typical demise is much more likely to be FIV, FeLV, traumatic (automobile, dogs and other cats most common), exposure, malnutrition and starvation.

The average feral cat doesn't live to see three years of age. As far as reproduction of species goes-because of their truncated feral lifespan-they've got to squeeze out some progeny STAT. They do a pretty good job of it.

[ChickenOfTheSea]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

Between Chickens and Grapes:

The number of genes that humans have was estimated at 6.7 million in 1984... current estimate is around 22000... chickens have ~16736 protein encoding genes, and grapes 30,434...

Shoot... we are arguably less advanced than grapes... [X(] [8|] [:D]

Remember that grapes and other plants have to make everything they need from light, CO2, water, and a little fertilizer.
That takes a lot more proteins and more genes. We have the luxury of eating the things they already made for us.

[Mynok]

They do a frackin A-class bang-up job of it.

Fixed that for you.

[Kwik E Mart]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Per, I'm trying to decide if I dislike you versus Kwik E Mart more these days...it's a very tough choice. [:'(] [;)]

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso
Er... i would hope it was pretty obvious (from the examples given) that by most standard the number of genes doesn't have much to do with how "advanced" a species is.

Yes, it was pretty obvious. With the exception of myself, as I indicated. [:'(]

I concur about your thoughts on diversity does not equal inception / initial introduction. So many factors influence what genetic phenotypes predominate in a given area over long stretches of evolutionary time. I haven't done an anatomic comparison between F. silvestris or Panthera spp. to juxtapose their renal physiology versus today's F. catus (and presumed geographical origins), but my loose understanding is that they're pretty darn similar.

Unless you knew most pre-Felis domesticus or Felis silvestris catus or Felis catus or Hotrodicus tidbiticus (oops-the latter was Roadrunner taxonomy...), your experiences with modern cats and renal disease is likely unrelated to their evolutionary renal physiologic function so much as a hazards associated with domestication and aging.

To whit: because you probably haven't known many feral Felis catus animals or what caused their demise at what age, your sampling from personal experience is biased and not reflective of the species on the whole. Most cats (by species number) are not domesticated in the behavioral sense. For them, a typical demise is much more likely to be FIV, FeLV, traumatic (automobile, dogs and other cats most common), exposure, malnutrition and starvation.

The average feral cat doesn't live to see three years of age. As far as reproduction of species goes-because of their truncated feral lifespan-they've got to squeeze out some progeny STAT. They do a pretty good job of it.

Right - my point exactly... the renal physiology of the cat family is unlikely to die out as it confers a survival advantage (ie - ability to successfully utilize water that might kill humans or other animals), and any possible disadvantage don't show up until the individual have reproduced.

An analogy might be how genetically-induced Alzheimer's disease* wouldn't naturally leave the human population by selective survival... the problem doesn't show up until after the reproductive years. Other illnesses could also be examples (i.e. polycystic kidney disease, Huntington's disease, etc.)

Of course, these illnesses might be cured by other means (i.e. gene therapy) in the future.

*note - apparently not all Alzheimer's is caused by genetic influences.

[Kwik E Mart]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso
Er... i would hope it was pretty obvious (from the examples given) that by most standard the number of genes doesn't have much to do with how "advanced" a species is.

Yes, it was pretty obvious. With the exception of myself, as I indicated. [:'(]

I concur about your thoughts on diversity does not equal inception / initial introduction. So many factors influence what genetic phenotypes predominate in a given area over long stretches of evolutionary time. I haven't done an anatomic comparison between F. silvestris or Panthera spp. to juxtapose their renal physiology versus today's F. catus (and presumed geographical origins), but my loose understanding is that they're pretty darn similar.

Unless you knew most pre-Felis domesticus or Felis silvestris catus or Felis catus or Hotrodicus tidbiticus (oops-the latter was Roadrunner taxonomy...), your experiences with modern cats and renal disease is likely unrelated to their evolutionary renal physiologic function so much as a hazards associated with domestication and aging.

To whit: because you probably haven't known many feral Felis catus animals or what caused their demise at what age, your sampling from personal experience is biased and not reflective of the species on the whole. Most cats (by species number) are not domesticated in the behavioral sense. For them, a typical demise is much more likely to be FIV, FeLV, traumatic (automobile, dogs and other cats most common), exposure, malnutrition and starvation.

The average feral cat doesn't live to see three years of age. As far as reproduction of species goes-because of their truncated feral lifespan-they've got to squeeze out some progeny STAT. They do a pretty good job of it.

Right - my point exactly... the renal physiology of the cat family is unlikely to die out as it confers a survival advantage (ie - ability to successfully utilize water that might kill humans or other animals), and any possible disadvantage don't show up until the individual have reproduced.

An analogy might be how genetically-induced Alzheimer's disease* wouldn't naturally leave the human population by selective survival... the problem doesn't show up until after the reproductive years. Other illnesses could also be examples (i.e. polycystic kidney disease, Huntington's disease, etc.)

Of course, these illnesses might be cured by other means (i.e. gene therapy) in the future.

*note - apparently not all Alzheimer's is caused by genetic influences.

speaking of renal physiology...it's clear to me that cats are far more advanced than any other life form on earth...hmmm...they're probably from Mynok's neck of the woods...[:D]

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso
Er... i would hope it was pretty obvious (from the examples given) that by most standard the number of genes doesn't have much to do with how "advanced" a species is.

Yes, it was pretty obvious. With the exception of myself, as I indicated. [:'(]

I concur about your thoughts on diversity does not equal inception / initial introduction. So many factors influence what genetic phenotypes predominate in a given area over long stretches of evolutionary time. I haven't done an anatomic comparison between F. silvestris or Panthera spp. to juxtapose their renal physiology versus today's F. catus (and presumed geographical origins), but my loose understanding is that they're pretty darn similar.

Unless you knew most pre-Felis domesticus or Felis silvestris catus or Felis catus or Hotrodicus tidbiticus (oops-the latter was Roadrunner taxonomy...), your experiences with modern cats and renal disease is likely unrelated to their evolutionary renal physiologic function so much as a hazards associated with domestication and aging.

To whit: because you probably haven't known many feral Felis catus animals or what caused their demise at what age, your sampling from personal experience is biased and not reflective of the species on the whole. Most cats (by species number) are not domesticated in the behavioral sense. For them, a typical demise is much more likely to be FIV, FeLV, traumatic (automobile, dogs and other cats most common), exposure, malnutrition and starvation.

The average feral cat doesn't live to see three years of age. As far as reproduction of species goes-because of their truncated feral lifespan-they've got to squeeze out some progeny STAT. They do a pretty good job of it.

Right - my point exactly... the renal physiology of the cat family is unlikely to die out as it confers a survival advantage (ie - ability to successfully utilize water that might kill humans or other animals), and any possible disadvantage don't show up until the individual have reproduced.

An analogy might be how genetically-induced Alzheimer's disease* wouldn't naturally leave the human population by selective survival... the problem doesn't show up until after the reproductive years. Other illnesses could also be examples (i.e. polycystic kidney disease, Huntington's disease, etc.)

Of course, these illnesses might be cured by other means (i.e. gene therapy) in the future.

*note - apparently not all Alzheimer's is caused by genetic influences.

Ah-I get where you're going now. My genetically (or non-genetically) influenced alzheimers was having trouble keeping track of the conversation. [;)]

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

speaking of renal physiology...it's clear to me that cats are far more advanced than any other life form on earth...hmmm...they're probably from Mynok's neck of the woods...[:D]

The really amazing thing is that's a picture of just one cat, but he's doing the time travel thing and having a laser battle with himself.

[Kwik E Mart]

ORIGINAL: Grollub

Evening tithe.

Todays balcony pic; Part of the pool area.

in tomorrow's edition, please zoom in a bit more...i'm trying to determine if this is a topless resort/hotel...[8D]

[Kwik E Mart]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

speaking of renal physiology...it's clear to me that cats are far more advanced than any other life form on earth...hmmm...they're probably from Mynok's neck of the woods...[:D]

The really amazing thing is that's a picture of just one cat, but he's doing the time travel thing and having a laser battle with himself.

sort of a schrodinger's cat? [;)]

[ctangus]

Tithe!!!

[ctangus]

It's probably been 2-3 years since I've tithed. I hope no one wants to collect arrears... [:D]

Is Martin (VSWG) still hanging out?