Having done some research recently on collies, I like this.
— James Faghmous , New to Machine Learning? Avoid these three mistakes
— Halsey Bagg, 1920, Archives of Genetics Mono. Vol 43, p.1 (via Rosalind Arden)
The tower and the park
The Arts Tower and Western Bank Library at the University of Sheffield.
"Hurrah then for confusion and mystery in medicine."
A mesmeric physician taking advantage of his female patient. Colour lithograph, 1852
Wellcome Images L0034922
Fancy Pigeon (and English Carrier, top right) Breeds
Easily domesticated, with short generation times and friendly disposition, pigeons have long been ideal for “fancy” breeders - people who wanted to breed an animal based on looks, like the majority of modern dog and cat breeds.
Where the standard carrier pigeon is the simply-colored greyhound of the sky, fancy pigeons are everything from the problem-ridden, overly-droopy modern iteration of the basset hound, to the functional-but-fancy Cardigan Welsh corgi, to the ornamental-but-sound Maltese.
A fancy pigeon show is more like a cat show than a dog show, though. The breeds have largely been derived for their looks, though a few (such as the Maine Coon cat, or the Scandaroon pigeon) served additional purposes at some point in time. The animals are kept in cages, divided by color and type, and are most prized if they’re relaxed with handling, but still the type to “strut” and show off.
Darwin starts Origin with a consideration of pigeons.
The Challenger Reports, Volume XXI, Plate I. The Hexactinellida, Euplectella aspergillum Owen. A glass sponge, popularly known as “Venus’s flower basket.” Collected in the Philippine Islands at a depth of 100 fathoms.
Natural selection of phenotypes cannot in itself produce cumulative change, because phenotypes are extremely temporary manifestations. They are the result of interactions between genotype and environment that produces what we recognize as an individual. Such an individual consists of genotypic information and information recorded since conception. Socrates consisted of the genes his parents gave him, the experiences they and his environment later provided, and the growth a development mediated by numerous meals. For all I know, he may have been very successful in the evolutionary sense of leaving numerous offspring. His phenotype, nevertheless, was utterly destroyed by the hemlock and has never since been duplicated. If the hemlock had not killed him, something else soon would have. So however natural selection may have been acting on Greek phenotypes in the forth century B.C., it did not of itself produce any cumulative effect.
The same argument holds also for genotypes. With Socrates’ death, not only did his phenotype disappear, but also his genotype. […] The loss of Socrates’ genotype is not assuaged by any consideration of how prolifically he may have reproduced. Socrates’ genes may be with us yet, but not his genotype, because meiosis and recombination destroy genotypes as surely as death."