http://www.agroblogger.com/2009/07/09/the-gaia-response/ Agroecology...agroforestry...agrorevolution Tue, 02 Feb 2010 00:05:36 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 http://www.agroblogger.com/2009/07/09/the-gaia-response/comment-page-1/#comment-22770 DR.COPE Tue, 02 Feb 2010 00:05:36 +0000 http://www.agroblogger.com/?p=307#comment-22770 THIS IS COOL BUT PUT DATES http://www.agroblogger.com/2009/07/09/the-gaia-response/comment-page-1/#comment-22652 James Jones Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:32:17 +0000 http://www.agroblogger.com/?p=307#comment-22652 The best, and most entertaining treatment of this troubling possibility: that intelligence is (or can be) an evolutionary dead end is given in Kurt Vonnegut’s "Galapagos"... ;-) Now, personally, I think intelligence is rarer than humans might think, for to analyze a set of data, evaluate it in its entirety (this may be beyond our skill) and then ACT on the outcome is not common to the average humans experience. Many of my peers, while judged intelligent in a general sense, do not analyze or even make themselves aware of events beyond their immediate geographical area, although the tools are available to the to do so, and further reduce the effectiveness of their “intelligence” by anticipating where events MIGHT be going – they simply don’t care, the performance of their sports team is of much greater interest, I think we judge people to be intelligent based on good vocabularies and interests that align with our own, maybe these dull sods have it right and its all beyond our reach so t’hell with it. But those of us compelled to analyze, predict, and dissect the present and future, and who feel compelled to act on those activities, while probably no happier… May or may not be able to stave off the rather forbidding looking consequences that appear to be looming… But as an optimist, I think those who commit to applying more technology to our personal environments can carve out an existence regardless of the changes to come. We may end up treating the earth as a hostile alien planet to be re-colonized, but at least those who thrive will be well suited to ANY future that may come. Now, personally, I think intelligence is rarer than humans might think, for to analyze a set of data, evaluate it in its entirety (this may be beyond our skill) and then ACT on the outcome is not common to the average humans experience. Many of my peers, while judged intelligent in a general sense, do not analyze or even make themselves aware of events beyond their immediate geographical area, although the tools are available to the to do so, and further reduce the effectiveness of their “intelligence” by anticipating where events MIGHT be going – they simply don’t care, the performance of their sports team is of much greater interest, I think we judge people to be intelligent based on good vocabularies and interests that align with our own, maybe these dull sods have it right and its all beyond our reach so t’hell with it. But those of us compelled to analyze, predict, and dissect the present and future, and who feel compelled to act on those activities, while probably no happier… May or may not be able to stave off the rather forbidding looking consequences that appear to be looming… But as an optimist, I think those who commit to applying more technology to our personal environments can carve out an existence regardless of the changes to come. We may end up treating the earth as a hostile alien planet to be re-colonized, but at least those who thrive will be well suited to ANY future that may come.]]> http://www.agroblogger.com/2009/07/09/the-gaia-response/comment-page-1/#comment-22479 Alex Fri, 31 Jul 2009 14:47:35 +0000 http://www.agroblogger.com/?p=307#comment-22479 Nothing says intelligence is a successful long term evolutionary strategy. Natural selection seems to always be seen through the lens of competition (insight into our own nature?) If one really looks though it seems that nature has always selected cooperative behavior as the most successful. The Ebola virus for example, burns through suitable habitat much to quickly, it kills its hosts too quickly to be transmitted at a large scale. Aids on the other hand waits a very long time before creating health impacting consequences. I think if left untreated though it would ravage humanity to a point that it had a hard time finding new hosts. Contrast this with mitochondria, lichens, or micorhizal fungi. Cooperative nature ensures that both parties always have a suitable environment. They're in it for the long term. Humans need to become cooperative organisms, both with each other and with the ecosystem at large. I think its somewhat critical that when these impacts start to occur, those of us cooperative in nature aren't outcompeted by wealthy individualists that might use their savings to buy and protect vast tracks of land in places that might be favored by climate change. Climate change is certainly the next catalyst for evolution. It will act on us the same as every other organism. I think which direction it steers us will ultimately decide whether we become a stable and ever present species in the world, or a species that flares up and burns its self out over and over.