I agree with Bob Church's statement about the definition of domesticated.
 
>Therefore concluding that the superlative of the ferret's evolution in
>not yet here, we are obliged as intelligent beings to define the ferrets
>evolutionary status as "comparative,." and as such we have no choice but
>to use the comparative degree of domesticity or the word "domestic" rather
>than "domesticated."
 
If "domesticated" means "a final form of genetic mutation" (see note below)
as you imply above, then someone needs to run around to the cattle ranchers
and explain to them that their cattle are not domexticated.  Prior to 1931,
there was no such breed as Beefmaster cattle, so that obviously means that
cattle are *NOT* domesticated as mankind is still changing their genetic
code.
 
>In the ferret, or any animal, including man himself, the ultimate degree
>of change has not yet been achieved, to be sure.
 
 ....just like dogs, ferrets, cats, goldfish, I get it now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Absolutely, positively, CERTAINLY no animal is "domesticated" since they
have not reached "the superlative of [that animal]'s evolution".  Gosh, I
sure hope that someone is paying attention when those stupid animals
finally get their genetic code PERFECT.  Sure would hate to miss it!
 
>As a matter of fact you will be hard put to define the adjective
>"domesticated," as indicative of having reached an end point in the
>evolution of the organism.
 
But, you *just* did....throughout your wordy response, you refer to
"domesticated" as the superlative form of evolution.  It's not *usually*
good form to start a circular argument against YOURSELF.  I fully agree, it
is VERY hard to define "domesticated" as "indicative indicative of having
reached an end point in the evolution of the organism" because THAT'S NOT
WHAT IT MEANS.
 
Well, maybe in the Ed-zarro Universe, but not on this planet in this
language.  Ed should make a killing on those stacks of dictionaries he
hass stashed in the thrid bunker of his compound once they go on sale and
everyone in the scientific community learns the true meaning of
"domesticated."
 
>Is the final analysis does the use of the term, "domesticated" as a
>superlative adjectival modifier of the noun, "ferret" indicative of the
>ignorance of the writer?  I'm afraid the answer is positive.  Hogwash?
 
No, Ed, that is one part of your post with which I can CERTAINLY agree!  I
wish I had nothing better to do than write 54 sentences consisting of 494
words merely to call myself "ignorant" as you did yesterday.  That's one
point which I don't think is open for debate any longer!
[Posted in FML issue 2576]