Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site alice.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!alice!ark
From: ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Lame?  LAME???
Message-ID: <3563@alice.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 12-Apr-85 10:41:25 EST
Article-I.D.: alice.3563
Posted: Fri Apr 12 10:41:25 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 13-Apr-85 05:31:26 EST
References: <1576@decwrl.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Labs, Murray Hill
Lines: 26

> Look, the old idea that you cut off a rat's tail enough times and it produces
> rats with no tails is bunk, right??  Well, if the rat bit off his own tail,
> even if it helped him survive - in a cosmic lab where naughty things were
> done to rats that could be lifted out of their cages by their tails - seems
> only to be saying the same thing.  It's another example of 'evolution
> science' running wild!  If I throw a rat against the wall (splat) enough
> times, will it one day, before it dies, bounce back???  (Sounds like a good
> idea for a government grant for some smart grad assistant, eh?)

If there were "a cosmic lab where naughty things were done to rats that
could be lifted out of their cages by their tails," I would expect:

	1. If behavior is genetically predisposed, then the
	   surviving rat population would eventually show a
	   tendency to bite off their tails.

	2. If a random mutation produced a fertile, tailless
	   rat that could pass its taillessness on to its
	   offspring, the population would become tailless
	   fairly soon after that.

	3. A similar situation would ensue if a random mutation
	   produced a rat with a tail that would break off
	   if grabbed.

Do you think these statements are also 'evolution science running wild?'