From: "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" 
Subject: RE: (urth) contra Summa contra Marcus
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 14:16:29 -0800

> > system, then, some mechanism must be provided for the motion
> > away from the Solar system to somehow bring the WHORL back
> > to the Solar system.

> It flew in a circle, as Pas/Typhon intended.

Well, this is at least plausible. But is there any _textual
evidence_ in its favor?


> > II. The genetic objection.
> > The life forms of Blue/Green are sufficiently different
> > from those of Urth that some mechanism must be proposed,
> > and evidence given, for the production of one from the
> > other.

> The life forms of Blue are edible to those of Urth, and
> vica-versa.   On a galactic scale this is 99.99 percent
> smilarity.

While this is clever, it entirely evades the questions
actually asked about the genetic issues.

> > IV. The objection from gravitation

> It is not possible that the Blue/Green system could
> be gravitationally stable.   Ergo, it is recent.

It is not possible _if_ the distances given are accurate. 
However, there is no evidence that it is recent, and the
ability of the inhumi to make the crossing argues that 
the two worlds have been having reasonably near passages
for -- well, for long enough for such an expensive 
adaptation to have been worthwhile. There are two ways
out of this: 
(1) the Neighbors, after reaching Green, deliberately 
    engineered the inhumi to make the crossing -- which 
    seems kind of unlikely
(2) the ability to make the crossing is a side-effect 
    of some aspect of the inhumi physiology (about which 
    we -- probably -- do not know), originally evolved 
    to meet some other need. This is what biologists call 
    "pre-adaptationism," and is generally looked upon with
    some scorn, but I'll grant that GW is a bit of an
    evolutionary heretic so that's probably not an
    argument against this.

However, again, this is putting the cart before the horse:
all this is throwing hypotheticals at objections to an
original hypothetical which has yet to be significantly
supported from the text.

> > Similarly, the failure of Horn to describe any real
> > difference in weight, trajectory of thrown objects, walking
> > gait, etc., between the surfaces of Blue, Green, and the

> 1) The large animals of Green

A brief glance at the geological history of Terra suggests that
some extremely large animals are capable of existing under 1G
conditions ... unless you care to suggest that the gravity of
Earth has significantly increased since the age of dinosaurs?

> 2) The vast trees of Green

I live a few hours' drive from the giant redwoods of California.
The trees of Green do not strike me as a significant argument 
for low gravity.

--Blattid


--