Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 00:29:25 -0500
From: Jeff Wilson 
Subject: Re: (urth) Liev's Postpostulate

>      From: 
>           "Roy C. Lackey" 
> 
>  Jeff Wilson quoted and wrote:
> 
> >> Wolfe doesn't make many things any clearer than that. Victor is well
> aware
> >> that it is his inability to control his thumb as a human does that is the
> >> cause of his poor penmanship. It is also why Dollo's Law was cited
> >> immediately after relating his writing woes. Dollo's Law does not address
> >> recalcitrance or bad habits; it addresses lost function and the inability
> to
> >> regain it. The Annese, though otherwise quite human, somehow lost the
> normal
> >> human usage of their thumbs. It's that simple.
> >
> >I thought we just worked out that Dollo's Law is =not= about function;
> >dolphins swim just as good as fish if not better.
> 
> "if the offspring return to a mode of life in which the vestigial organ had
> an important function, the organ does not return to its original state, but
> the organism develops a substitute." (Ace, 231)
> 
> I wasn't really debating Dollo's Law but, yes, it is about function. An
> organ which loses a function never regains that function. The organism may
> develop another organ, or adapt an existing organ to compensate for the lost
> functionality of the original organ, but once an organ loses a function it
> is lost to that organ forever. The ability of a mammal to return to the sea
> and thrive there does not contravene the law.

The mammal's return shows that the function can return, even if the
original organ does not. The dolphin's dorsal serves in place of a
fish's, even though the original bony structures are long gone. So why
can't a shapeshifting abo likewise manifest new appendages to do the
work of human hands it may have had long ago?

-- 
Jeff Wilson
How Am I Posting? 1-800-555-6789
"If your SecOp can see you, so can the enemy." -Cpt Law


--