Linda Stuart (assisted by Pixel, Noel and Pear) wrote:
 
"A paleobiologist named Bob
Shares a futon with jills and with hobs.
Says he, "I just love it;
I shant rise above it:
My business beats all other jobs!""
 
OooooOooooOOooOOOooooOOOO. That one made me lose control over my vowels.
 
Thanks, I am very flattered. So much so that I have to respond:
 
Bob knows any bone you can find,
'Cause bones are all he has on his mind.
But he has to agree
With Linda (plus three),
That ferret bones are the best kind.
   _____
 
Ed (What?  Again?) is still confused about some domestication stuff.  Ok:
 
Wild: Any animal living in a natural condition, subject to natural
selection, uncontrolled or behaviorally modified by humans.
 
Tame: An animal with zero fright/flight reaction to humans.  Has nothing to
do with wildness or domestication; a feral cat is domesticated, but clearly
not tame, while a marine iguana is clearly wild but tame.
 
Trained: Conditioned to human commands.  Has nothing to do with
domestication; a grizley bear is not domesticated, but it can be trained
to dance, while a domesticated cat is too evil to be trained.  (hehehe).
 
Domesticated: An animal that is (1) bred by humans (or under human
selection rather than natural selection), for (2) human benefit (food,
work, companionship etc.), and (3) having at least one change which
increases human benefits (like lush fur, more milk, etc.).  No more, no
less.  If you have the first two, you could say the animal was 'semi-
domesticated,' but that word has little meaning.  Once you have all three,
the animal is domesticated; there is no degree.  YES, change can continue
to occur, but it doesn't matter; the animal is *STILL* domesticated.  Its
sort of like another state of domestication; one wife or three, you are
still married regardless of number (or legal problems).  You cannot say a
person is only "semi" or "partially" married because there may be a future
different spouse.  Domesticated is domesticated and married is hell.
 
Feral: A domesticated animal that has reverted to the wild and once again
subject to natural selection, usually with the loss of one or more traits
of domestication.  Wild animals cannot be feral because they are not
domesticated.  So why does the CaCaLand Fishing Gestapo and Mental
Masterbation Society insist that ferrets are (1) wild, and (2) a danger
because they will go feral?  Perhaps a lack of education?  Wild animals
are "introduced," domesticated animals are "feral." I guess you have to
understand the basics before you can use the terminology properly, which
explains a lot about the CaCaLand Fishing Gestapo and Microbrain
Corporation and their stance against ferrets.  Poopheads.
 
Ed, if you can't get this, get Roger A. Caras 1996 "A Perfect Harmony"
(Simon and Schuster) and read it from cover to cover.  Do not skip the
glossary.  Then keep re-reading it until you get it.
  ____
 
Ed's discussion of transplanted ferret embryos in human hosts reminds
me of an actual event in 18th century England where a woman gave birth
to rabbits.  Many of them, and not just rabbits, but also rabbit parts.
Turned out to be a hoax; the woman was able to push the parts past her
cervix into her uterus, and later gave "birth" to them.  Books were
published on the event, the king sent his own doctor to investigate, and a
really cool song was published, entitled "When the Squire Turned Ferret."
True story.
 
So, when the human volunteer gives birth to the transplanted ferrets, do
we sing "Pop Goes the Weasel?"
 
Well, Ed, sorry, but the protein differences between the ferret and human
host would cause the embryos to be aborted.  And even if not aborted, the
embryo is subject to maternal hormones which help regulate development; the
gestation periods are way out of whack.  The human/primate stuff might work
because we are so closely related and gestation periods are so close.  As
for the mother, it could possibly also cause inflamation of the uterus and
other serious feminine problems, some of which I have seen pictures of and
still have nightmares.  Women have no "business" hosting ferret embryos.
Men?  Ok, but not women.
   ____
 
Considering the level of scholarship at the time, the King James version of
the Bible was remarkably accurate.  Still, 'ferret' in Leviticus 11:29-30
was a serious mistranslation and was clearly meant to be some other animal,
probably the gecko.  Since ferrets were not domesticated when Leviticus was
supposedly written, the reference could not be a ferret.  That the word is
not a ferret is supported by modern translations as well as modern Jewish
interpretations of the passage.  Also, since polecats are not found in
biblical Israel during this time period, it is unlikely they would ever be
mentioned in any context.  BUT, I have one recent book that claims "ferret"
is mentioned in Isiah 13:21-22 as well.  I have sent a letter to the author
requesting his source for the translations, since neither are in any modern
Christian (non-King James influenced) or Jewish translations that I can
find.  I'll let you all know when I find out, but I suspect it is nothing
more than poor or limited scholarship.
 
Bob C and 17 Mo' Ferret Detectives (Missing Apollo and Crystal)
[Posted in FML issue 2721]