Posted on 02/20/2005 10:36:58 AM PST by furball4paws
An article purporting to show simple mathematical relationships in Biology and Ecology.
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencenews.org ...
It's difficult to estimate the effect of one man's enormous success in applying the scientific method to a field. How many others did that inspire? Similarly, how many scientists of any kind would we have today were it not for the example set by Newton? Anyway, just because we can't quantify Darwin's contribution with respect to all that followed, it's foolish to discount it.
I will still stick to Pasteur. The discovery of disease causing organisms and subsequently, vaccines was an enormous boost to human life. These discoveries led to Lister's antiseptic surgery.
True, all science led to these advances, but the nexus falls on diseases, as far as human longevity is concerned and that, more than anything else, is due to a chemist turned microbiologist, Pasteur.
Funny, the French still thinks the scientific world revolves around the Institute of Pasteur. How sad for them.
I think jennyp might like to put in a vote for capitalism and I suppose you could make a good case, not necessarily for the discoveries, but for turning those discoveries into useful things.
Me too. What good is a long life -- or any life -- without freedom?
Pasteur's most famous quote, "Chance favors the prepared mind" is worth remembering on these threads. It is not "Chance favors the closed mind".
This is especially important when Fleming came along and discovered penicillin. Others had observed the same thing he did, and published, yet Fleming was prepared and he saw the implications.
I doubt that anyone at FR would be here today without Fleming's "prepared" mind.
Closer to 50 and with several orders of magnitude higher infant mortality rates which skew the average downward significantly.
what's your take on the frequency with which fibonacci series and the fibonacci ratio appear in organic structures?
kinda creeps me out, a bit.
I thought that was Flemming. I'm too lazy to Google.
What do you think the average life span of an ancient Eqyptian was? Even in the Middle Ages, I don't think the average man lived past 45 years.
I think life spans were still in the 40s around 1900, very little changed from pre-tech times. Infectious diseases (mainly tuberculosis and pneumonia) were the main killers because there were no antibiotics at all. Heart attack, cancer, and stroke were well down the list of causes of death. Modern surgery of a sort (anesthetic drugs and sterile procedure) existed but was limited by the lack of blood banks. It also wasn't available to many people. Nobody had heard of Alzheimer's.
/////////////////////
If you believe the bible there have been people who lived in the middle east who lived considerably longer.
Since there likely have been many "golden ages" over the eons where human population, food supply, habitat and climate balanced nicely--it is easily believable that there have been many times and places where men and women hit the currently recognized physical age limit of 120-130. And that before we even begin to talk about methusalah.
That said--generally what's kept "average" rates down until the 20th century has been death in child birth. The toll on women who died on child birth has been high too. Enough, in fact, to make one consider doing a comparative study of mother death by childbirth between humans and other animals.
What do you think the average life span of an ancient Eqyptian was? Even in the Middle Ages, I don't think the average man lived past 45 years.
I think life spans were still in the 40s around 1900, very little changed from pre-tech times. Infectious diseases (mainly tuberculosis and pneumonia) were the main killers because there were no antibiotics at all. Heart attack, cancer, and stroke were well down the list of causes of death. Modern surgery of a sort (anesthetic drugs and sterile procedure) existed but was limited by the lack of blood banks. It also wasn't available to many people. Nobody had heard of Alzheimer's.
/////////////////////
If you believe the bible there have been people who lived in the middle east who lived considerably longer.
Since there likely have been many "golden ages" over the eons where human population, food supply, habitat and climate balanced nicely--it is easily believable that there have been many times and places where men and women hit the currently recognized physical age limit of 120-130. And that before we even begin to talk about methusalah.
That said--generally what's kept "average" rates down until the 20th century has been death in child birth. The toll on women who died on child birth has been high too. Enough, in fact, to make one consider doing a comparative study of mother death by childbirth between humans and other animals.
It started with rabbits. Anything that starts with rabbits is bound to have some natural in it.
Know the story. Don't buy it.
Maximum life spans have been basically unchanged by technology so far. (Although we may be making a dent, raising the maximum a little just of late. Some fortunate and hardy people used to live to 100, but not 120.)
Against that, the average life span has increased greatly over the last century due to improvements in living conditions, medicine, and food supply. We simply don't have it so rough anymore. We don't risk our lives to feed our bellies. There are all kinds life-saving interventions routinely done know which were unknown in 1900. Lowered childbirth risk is in there, yes, but it's part of a more general change.
ping for time check
Good insight on your part.
YEC INTREP
True, though which single economist's work would you pin that on? That seemed to be a group effort. Did Adam Smith do research before he wrote The Wealth of Nations? I wonder. Perhaps David Ricardo, with his law of comparative advantage, ranks up there in single-handedly helping accelerate the Industrial Revolution.
Mises, Hayek, & Rand were certainly influential, but their full legacy is let to be written, I think. Perhaps that mathematician who demonstrated that the Prisoners' Dilemma evaporates when the participants play the game over & over with each other (thus demonstrating that honest & cooperative behavior - in civilization - is the most profitable policy) will have the biggest long-term effect.
Perhaps that mathematician who demonstrated that the Prisoners' Dilemma evaporates when the participants play the game over & over with each other (thus demonstrating that honest & cooperative behavior - in civilization - is the most profitable policy) will have the biggest long-term effect.
Do you have a link for this? I would be interested.
As you might have guessed, I try to throw Objectivist like things your way when I run into them. They need as much air time as we can muster.
Thanks, I will read it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.