I am soooo disappointed.  Why is it the Ruprecht Kirche has flushed out a
torrent of...well, you name it if you will, as if he had been smacked in
the kisser with a treatise on "Gross Primitiveness in the Domestic Ferret
and Its Relativistic Aggression on Infantis Humanus?"
 
I fail to understand why the Sorcerer of Erudition, when presented with the
Socrotean method of questioning jumps to the erronous conclusion that the
questions are in fact "factual," when in reality they are simple questions
and not "fixed in concrete" assertions.  Did this little Edward stumble on
a rarely touched "Hot Button?" Whew!  It certainly looks that way, doesn't
it?  Somehow I feel his literary fingers closing about my throat, especially
the patently porous personal insultive quips thinly disguised as "humor."
Surely you can be funny and at the same time a bit less prickerly.  Please.
 
Hesus Kristos.  Confront thy adversary with an argument and please leave
out the degrading epithets.  I will most certainly defer to your
presentation when and if the assertions you make are intellectually
supportive of your stand on an issue.  Thanks.
 
The questions I posed I gleaned from a local newspaper.  I thought them
apropos of the FML even though they did not pertain specifically to the
ferret.  I added the word, "ferret" and the following "(sic)" to indicate
the word was not initially included in the newspaper listing of the
mustelids.  Somebody on the net was asking about that.
 
Golly, I never ever thought of the ferret as "primitive," what ever that
word means in this case.  The jist appears to be the lacking of a
communicative senses in all the musties, in comparison to other mammals.
Your focus on the other aspects of the ferrets evolutionary development is
perhaps an example of your eruditous redundancy, so often typical of your
postings.  I defer to the KISS principle.
 
I would hope you'd care to express your opinions on the differences in
communicative skills of the primitive ferret in both the native American
Black-footed ferret and the (Oh no - I've got to say it...) domestic
(domesticated) ferret.  And while you're at it, maybe you could touch on
the relationship between primitiveness and the hunting/killing instinct
of both ferrets.  And in so doing, give us a comparative sense of the
difference in domesticity between the two ferrets.  Or, do you (I hope not)
regard both ferrets as equally domestic(ated)?
 
Now this brings up an interesting aspect that has not come into my ken
heretofore: are there differing degrees of domestication?  As for example,
at what point or evolutionary development period of the dog from the wolf
could one say with a reasonable sense of intellectual comfort that the
"fog" of domesticity became measureable in the wolf/dog?  Surely as the
wolf evolved to the domestic dog, somewhere along the timescale of
evolving, what we recognize as "wildness" was diminished and "domesticity"
was apparent.  Now, how do we translate that to the ferret's evolutionary
growth, or as I sometimes prefer to call it, the repression of innate
characteristics?
 
And now with respect to my seemingly sexist proclivities, as some would
have it, please be aware that my less-than-glowing affirmation of the (as
Rudyard Kipling put it, the deadliest of the species) female volunteer
shelter worker is testimonial to only those girls and women who actually
worked here in the past 18 years that this geriatric shelter has been in
existence.  Repeat: only those girls and women who have worked here the
last 18 years.  Ye Gods!  That does not include all women-kind by any
means.
 
Yet to read the critiques, one would assume such was my inclusion.  You
Ruprecht, like others of similar ilk have taken an assumption and run
amok with it.  Too bad.  Too bad.
 
Hmmm.  That makes two too bads = to one four bad??
 
Edward Lipinski, who maintains:  domesticATED=DEAD.  (So Sorry buddy)
[Posted in FML issue 2747]