>>Terry you missied the point in my original and so did Doug about . Which surprises me about you cause it seems you used to be able to think more like a hippie than a yuppie.

Thanks. I'd definitely be happier with a foot -- or two -- in the hippie world than in the yuppie world.

That said, I think you misunderstand me. I think the hybrids you illustrated are interesting, some incredibly beautiful. I just don't think that because something's pretty, that alone justifies creating it. Homer Simpson's affinity for "shiny things" is well known, but it's not seen as a strong character trait. If one of those dramatic hybrids you showed were instead a newly discovered species, I'd be all over it. But they're not. Early in my herpetoculturist years, I bought a jungle corn and contemplated making more. But the shine wore off because they weren't "real", no more than the fish in pet stores that are painted to heighten their coloration.

If someone buys a forged painting, whether they know it's fake or not, it can't reproduce. It's not gonna spread further forgeries into the art world like some virus.

Similarly, someone can reconstruct a Model A from parts bin pieces from a dozen different cars, and it'll look like a Model A, but it's not the real thing: when you view it you're not seeing a Model A that rolled off a production line and then along America's highways 85 years ago. And someone can take a 57 chevy and chop it and add another model year's taillights and paint the chrome matte black, but it's no longer "a 57 chevy".

Should people be allowed to do those things? Of course. Then what's the difference between those and hybrids? Those modified cars won't infect the remaining genuine cars so that ten years later even fewer of the "real thing" will exist. They're not real, no more than kit cars.

Beauty alone shouldn't guide us. We must think about consequences.

[ Show Entire Thread ]