Hi from Cupper

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Hi Cupper and welcome!

Don't mind the kids, they can get unruly sometimes.

DO NOT!

[FBM]

Thanks all for the welcome, and I see that there are some seriously deranged posters who also enjoy their own contributions.

Sounds like it will be fun!

For the record, I regret most of my contributions, but I get the feeling that others derive some sort of fun from them, so I guess you're pretty much on track there.

[Azathoth]

When you say Gaia are you referring to Lovelock's teleological theory? It has been debunked quite ruthlessly.

[MiM]

Welcome cupper3. Ever tried leeches

[rachelbean]

Welcome, Cupper, hope you enjoy it here

[hadespussercats]

Cupper? I don't even know her!

(not that that's stopped me before )

Welcome!

[cupper3]

When you say Gaia are you referring to Lovelock's teleological theory? It has been debunked quite ruthlessly.

Scientifically, absolutely has been questioned,and should be from that perspective. Dawkins in particular is a significant participant in that discussion. However, from an ecological perspective, there is a lot to be said about the interconnectiveness of not only the biological components of earth, but the inorganic.

Let me give you an example. A study by Boyce et al on grizzly bears in Yellowstone National Park looked at some of the food sources. Horsetail is a dominant food source at specific times of the year. The natural hypothesis would be that the grizzlies would favor sites with an abundance of that food source.

That was not the case. In fact, Boyce found that grizzlies targeted horsetails that grew in soils that had certain mineral components over the areas where they were more abundant. This clearly is an example of the interconnnectiveness of both organic and inorganic substances beyond the obvious.

Spirituality is a different issue. However, we all know spirituality is not science based. Even though, from my perspective, listening to and being influenced by what nature tells us drives my personal spirituality. YMMV

[cupper3]

Welcome cupper3. Ever tried leeches

Why, are there some on this board?

[HomerJay]

Hi CupperTea, I take it your Oirish?

would you like a cup?

[Xamonas Chegwé]

When you say Gaia are you referring to Lovelock's teleological theory? It has been debunked quite ruthlessly.

Scientifically, absolutely has been questioned,and should be from that perspective. Dawkins in particular is a significant participant in that discussion. However, from an ecological perspective, there is a lot to be said about the interconnectiveness of not only the biological components of earth, but the inorganic.

Let me give you an example. A study by Boyce et al on grizzly bears in Yellowstone National Park looked at some of the food sources. Horsetail is a dominant food source at specific times of the year. The natural hypothesis would be that the grizzlies would favor sites with an abundance of that food source.

That was not the case. In fact, Boyce found that grizzlies targeted horsetails that grew in soils that had certain mineral components over the areas where they were more abundant. This clearly is an example of the interconnnectiveness of both organic and inorganic substances beyond the obvious.

Spirituality is a different issue. However, we all know spirituality is not science based. Even though, from my perspective, listening to and being influenced by what nature tells us drives my personal spirituality. YMMV

Surely, the predilection of grizzlies for Equisetum with particular minerals is simply a matter of a preferred flavour? The simplest explanation for this preference is evolutionary (assuming it is a necessary mineral for the bear) and reflects the better survival/breeding rates of bears that prefer eating more nutritious foods.

There really is no need to introduce Gaian woo to accommodate it.

[Bella Fortuna]

Thanks all for the welcome, and I see that there are some seriously deranged posters who also enjoy their own contributions.

Sounds like it will be fun!

If I don't enjoy my own posts, nobody will...

[cupper3]

When you say Gaia are you referring to Lovelock's teleological theory? It has been debunked quite ruthlessly.

Scientifically, absolutely has been questioned,and should be from that perspective. Dawkins in particular is a significant participant in that discussion. However, from an ecological perspective, there is a lot to be said about the interconnectiveness of not only the biological components of earth, but the inorganic.

Let me give you an example. A study by Boyce et al on grizzly bears in Yellowstone National Park looked at some of the food sources. Horsetail is a dominant food source at specific times of the year. The natural hypothesis would be that the grizzlies would favor sites with an abundance of that food source.

That was not the case. In fact, Boyce found that grizzlies targeted horsetails that grew in soils that had certain mineral components over the areas where they were more abundant. This clearly is an example of the interconnnectiveness of both organic and inorganic substances beyond the obvious.

Spirituality is a different issue. However, we all know spirituality is not science based. Even though, from my perspective, listening to and being influenced by what nature tells us drives my personal spirituality. YMMV

Surely, the predilection of grizzlies for Equisetum with particular minerals is simply a matter of a preferred flavour? The simplest explanation for this preference is evolutionary (assuming it is a necessary mineral for the bear) and reflects the better survival/breeding rates of bears that prefer eating more nutritious foods.

There really is no need to introduce Gaian woo to accommodate it.

No, not preferred flavor, but when they examined why, it was because of the minerals in the soil that were what the bears needed. One cannot point at evolution as the motivator, as horsetails do not grow throughout the grizzly's range, nor is that mineral composition available throughout it's range. Bears in other areas have less efficient, but alternate, ways of obtaining the minerals.

Regardless, it still shows the organic and inorganic synergy that exists.

[Audley Strange]

Spirituality is a different issue. However, we all know spirituality is not science based. Even though, from my perspective, listening to and being influenced by what nature tells us drives my personal spirituality. YMMV

Hello, welcome blah blah blah... Sorry to jump on you straight off but what do you by mean "spirituality" exactly?

And secondly, have you even noticed that generally "spiritual" tends to be a description applied to oneself, or to Gurus. No one ever says "my plumber is a deeply spiritual man."

That's why I'm asking, what do you actually mean when you say "spirituality?"

[amused]

...

No, not preferred flavor, but when they examined why, it was because of the minerals in the soil that were what the bears needed. One cannot point at evolution as the motivator, as horsetails do not grow throughout the grizzly's range, nor is that mineral composition available throughout it's range. Bears in other areas have less efficient, but alternate, ways of obtaining the minerals.

Regardless, it still shows the organic and inorganic synergy that exists.

If the plants have something in them that the bears need, then there is most likely something about the plants' taste that is 'better' or more attractive. The bears are simply adapting to their environment by finding the most efficient way to get the nutrition they need.

[Azathoth]

When you say Gaia are you referring to Lovelock's teleological theory? It has been debunked quite ruthlessly.

Scientifically, absolutely has been questioned,and should be from that perspective. Dawkins in particular is a significant participant in that discussion. However, from an ecological perspective, there is a lot to be said about the interconnectiveness of not only the biological components of earth, but the inorganic.

Let me give you an example. A study by Boyce et al on grizzly bears in Yellowstone National Park looked at some of the food sources. Horsetail is a dominant food source at specific times of the year. The natural hypothesis would be that the grizzlies would favor sites with an abundance of that food source.

That was not the case. In fact, Boyce found that grizzlies targeted horsetails that grew in soils that had certain mineral components over the areas where they were more abundant. This clearly is an example of the interconnnectiveness of both organic and inorganic substances beyond the obvious.

Spirituality is a different issue. However, we all know spirituality is not science based. Even though, from my perspective, listening to and being influenced by what nature tells us drives my personal spirituality. YMMV

Surely, the predilection of grizzlies for Equisetum with particular minerals is simply a matter of a preferred flavour? The simplest explanation for this preference is evolutionary (assuming it is a necessary mineral for the bear) and reflects the better survival/breeding rates of bears that prefer eating more nutritious foods.

There really is no need to introduce Gaian woo to accommodate it.

No, not preferred flavor, but when they examined why, it was because of the minerals in the soil that were what the bears needed. One cannot point at evolution as the motivator, as horsetails do not grow throughout the grizzly's range, nor is that mineral composition available throughout it's range. Bears in other areas have less efficient, but alternate, ways of obtaining the minerals.

Regardless, it still shows the organic and inorganic synergy that exists.

Sounds like learned behaviour. Bears are not stupid. Your example says nothing about Lovelock's horseshit though. Nobody is denying that there are interconnections between the organic and inorganic realms and symbiosis within ecosystems. The problem comes when he posits that life drives the inorganic realm to make it more favourable for ALL life. This is utter nonsense. Life can and does alter the environment. Any favourable effects are purely accidental and other lifeforms adapt to fit them. To suggest otherwise is where the teleological fallacy comes in. Bacteria do not have some altruistic grand plan for the planet.