Invaders !

[ShadowHM]

I have just read yet another news story about yet another invader into my beloved Great Lakes. :angry:

On the (teeny tiny) bright side, it *may* not really be here yet. But it was introduced on purpose, in yet another of those damned 'we will import something to control a problem that we created in the first place and we really don't need to look at the history of this kind of endeavour - damn the torpedos: full steam ahead' scenarios that we really, collectively, ought to know better than to try. The Asian Carp were *supposed* to help clear out the weeds and other 'detritus' that were in fish farms. <_<

Phragmites are newly invading in an extraordinary annual advancement and they look to be the worst of the lot. :o Two to five metre high grasses that can choke out everything else (including animals) and love waterfront are not welcome but are visible everywhere on the Bruce Peninsula now - in patches so far, but rapidly expanding patches. :unsure:

Zebra mussels have had their day too. I have had more than my share of cuts from them and I have watched how they 'cleared the water' with grim fascination.

Gobies have been another recent invader. Last summer, to my utter amazement, I could see about one every square metre as I snorkelled at my favourite swim spot.

And now I have giant carp to look forward to? The kind that want to jump into the boat with me and get up-close and personal? :blink: Or who will spawn in my bay and leave rotting 100 pound corpses on the beach? :blink::blink: And who, apparently, have the capacity to out-eat the local fish so we lose them too? <_<

I would ask 'When are we going to learn?', but I actually know that the answer is "NEVER"! ARGH!



There, I don't really feel much better for ranting, but I felt like doing it anyway. :P

[LavCat]

I have just read yet another news story about yet another invader into my beloved Great Lakes. :angry:

On the (teeny tiny) bright side, it *may* not really be here yet. But it was introduced on purpose, in yet another of those damned 'we will import something to control a problem that we created in the first place and we really don't need to look at the history of this kind of endeavour - damn the torpedos: full steam ahead' scenarios that we really, collectively, ought to know better than to try. The Asian Carp were *supposed* to help clear out the weeds and other 'detritus' that were in fish farms. <_<

Import Nile Perch to control them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nile_perch

[--Pete]

Hi,

I would ask 'When are we going to learn?', but I actually know that the answer is "NEVER"! ARGH!

Thank you for the inspiration. I've needed a new signature for a while now.

There, I don't really feel much better for ranting, but I felt like doing it anyway. :P

Sadly, sometimes it seems that all we can do is rant.

The damage we've done by introducing species into ecosystems is probably immeasurable, and yet there are few regulations and even those are poorly enforced. I still remember my weekly trimming of the kudzu in Atlanta. Great ground cover, indeed. :angry:

--Pete

[Bun-Bun]

There, I don't really feel much better for ranting, but I felt like doing it anyway. :P

I'm not sure that was a rant, it sounded more like carping.:)

[--Pete]

Hi,

I'm not sure that was a rant, it sounded more like carping.:)

Groan.

:rolleyes:

--Pete

[Zenda]

I would ask 'When are we going to learn?', but I actually know that the answer is "NEVER"! ARGH!

Unfortunately, it's going to be worse in the future, when we will be making the same mistakes with genetically 'enhanced' varieties. You know, the kind that looks economically promising, is strong enough to wipe out natural competition under favorable circumstances, and then gets wiped out itself by some innocent virus or a slight change of weather...

Even now, some people think we should introduce 'wonder trees' all over the world, just so we can continue bringing more CO2 into the atmosphere.

[kandrathe]

Unfortunately, it's going to be worse in the future, when we will be making the same mistakes with genetically 'enhanced' varieties.

Perhaps... we might genetically modify this giant species to eat the silver carp? And, the Jet Skiers... And, the boaters? It reminds me of the Lady who Swallowed the Fly.

I hope the cat fish at least eat the invasive eels. Also, if they jump out of the water when boats speed past, I'm thinking this might evolve into a great substitute for duck hunting.

[--Pete]

Hi,

. . . some innocent virus . . .

Shades of H.G. Wells.

As opposed to a guilty virus?

Isn't that taking your usual prejudicial attitude to a new petty level?

--Pete

[Zenda]

As opposed to a guilty virus?

I suppose that 'harmless' would have been a better choice of words, but then you'd have been robbed of the opportunity to reply to my post, not?;)

Or did you really think that all virusses are bad? (link)

[--Pete]

Hi,

I suppose that 'harmless' would have been a better choice of words, but then you'd have been robbed of the opportunity to reply to my post, not?;)

Oh, I don't know. I could probably have found another needle to poke you with, but that was just too good to pass up.

Or did you really think that all virusses are bad?

Actually, 'harmful' and 'harmless' would be better terms. Thank you for that link, I guess that I'll have to add 'beneficial' to the list of categories describing viruses. Viruses are neither 'good' nor 'bad' -- those are moral choices a bit above a virus' intellectual capacity. I've known since high school biology, around 1962, that most viruses are harmless to humans. I suspect a bacterium would not share my opinion that a bacteriophage was 'harmless'. Then again, perhaps bacteria don't have opinions.:)

--Pete

[ShadowHM]

I'm not sure that was a rant, it sounded more like carping.:)

:lol: Thanks for that. A smile is always welcome, even when it is from a pun.

[kandrathe]

Then again, perhaps bacteria don't have opinions.:)

Probably not. However, I'm becoming convinced that our ideas about organized thought requiring cellular clusters of neural material are probably wrong as well. There is some evidence of computational ability also happening within complex proteins themselves.

Protein Molecules as Computational Components in Living Cells, Bray, Nature, 1995

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Bray

[--Pete]

Hi,

However, I'm becoming convinced that our ideas about organized thought requiring cellular clusters of neural material are probably wrong as well. There is some evidence of computational ability also happening within complex proteins themselves.

Interesting paper. Mostly, I just skimmed it since I lack the vocabulary to fully understand it. However, the impression I came away with is that those proteins are more like logic gates -- possibly even as complex as logic arrays -- than like processors. Admittedly, the difference appears to be in quantity rather than quality. If Hofstadter's complexity premise in Gödel, Escher, Bach is correct, then neither the logic circuits nor the proteins are complex enough to form the necessary tangled hierarchies -- thus, they lack the ability to be self referential. So, while they can 'processes information', I doubt that they can think. Thus, they may be capable of prejudice but not of opinion. :whistling:

--Pete

[kandrathe]

It's been somewhat of a paradox of nature how simple organisms without nervous systems accomplish what seems to be intelligent behaviors. Specifically, I'm thinking about single celled organisms with flagella seems to be capable of "hunting". One would think you would need some organizational mechanism for that type of behavior (e.g. a central nervous system). But, even the behavior of planaria and other worms seems far more organized than you might think given their simple nervous systems.

[--Pete]

Hi,

It's been somewhat of a paradox of nature how simple organisms without nervous systems accomplish what seems to be intelligent behaviors.

I think that this paradox only exists in the minds of those who think that it takes complexity to generate complexity. Consider the simplicity of the rules of Go and the complexity of the game as played. Of course, you could claim, with much justification, that the human in the loop generates that complexity. So, look instead to the behavior of the computer game, Life, which can generate great complexity from simple rules without the need for human input (the initial conditions could be set randomly).

In other fields, consider the information complexity of DNA which is generated from two pairs of bases. Or that of logic circuits, based on two states. Or that of flocking behavior controlled by just a few simple rules. Or the complexity of mathematical systems based on just a few postulates and the rules of logic.

And, very often, the intelligent behavior turns out to be not very intelligent at all. It is often just hard wire responses that have been selected for through evolution. When the situation is changed, there is no ability to adjust for the change and what appeared intelligent now seems stupid. As an example, consider the case of the wasps who, when ready to lay their eggs, bring some prey to a preselected hole. The wasp then goes into the hole, presumably to verify that all is clear, then drags her prey into the hole and lays her eggs on it. If, while the wasp is conducting her examination, the pray is slightly moved, she will reposition it next to the hole and repeat the inspection. As often as the prey is moved, she will repeat this cycle. Her apparently 'intelligent' inspection of the hole is revealed as a hard wired trait. She does not progress to the state of 'thinking' "The hole is already cleared -- I don't need to repeat that step."

We are excellent at seeing patterns, often even if there are none to see. And we often try to explain behavior in terms of our own, often poorly understood, motivations and reactions. Anthropomorphism is probably the greatest impediment to studying nature and the greatest common error in that study. Like Kepler's eclipse, it sneaks back in through the window when we throw it out the door.

--Pete

[ShadowHM]

ARGH!

More news about Asian Carp. And one more example of how the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

Indiana company fined $20,000 in attempt to take live Asian carp into Ontario

[kandrathe]

ARGH!

More news about Asian Carp. And one more example of how the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

Indiana company fined $20,000 in attempt to take live Asian carp into Ontario

$20,000? It seems to be a rather paltry sum to deter future transactions. Do you think crop insurance covers that kind of a loss?

And... You can get a license to raise invasive species? Unbelievable.

Also... Not to let the two year old discussion die.... There have been many advances in biomolecular computing in the last two years corroborating the idea that organisms "compute" outside the brain.

[LavCat]

Also... Not to let the two year old discussion die.... There have been many advances in biomolecular computing in the last two years corroborating the idea that organisms "compute" outside the brain.

And here I thought it was going to be a post about alien life forms from that meteorite in Antarctica.

[kandrathe]

And here I thought it was going to be a post about alien life forms from that meteorite in Antarctica.

News Update: Antarctica Meteorite Supports Extraterrestrial Origins for Life

[ShadowHM]

Some good news on the Asian Carp front:

Ottawa commits $17M to stop Asian carp invasion

Although, I must say, the video at the end of the story is enough to give me serious pause. I sure hope I never see anything like that in Lake Huron.