Rather than relying on genetic sequence comparisons, he instead offers extensive anatomical comparisons, each of which may be individually assailable, but startling when taken together. Why weren’t these conclusions arrived at much sooner? McCarthy suggests it is because of an over-dependence on genetic data among biologists.
also they aren’t brain worms. FFS. They infect the muscle. Subject of my favorite story in “the medical detectives” with the punch line of “…and he ate his raw” (regarding a cluster of cases of trichinosis from undercooked pork sausage)
Everyone on that island looks kind of the same to me.
I get that people want to intuit patterns based on personal experience. That’s natural human behavior. But finding ways to seek knowledge that aren’t subjective and thus reproducible is kind of the point of science.
I wonder how far we’d have to go to find my common ancestor and Sting’s? Probably not that far, the plague put a pinch on the possible pool of European ancestors.
I ate black bear meat once. My aunt and uncle had a park ranger friend who gave them a bunch of meat from a culled bear. But they were made into hamburger meat, which was cut with beef (for the fat) and grilled very well.
I remember at the time it didn’t seem much different from a normal burger, except perhaps a little tougher.
Except bears aren’t Artiodactyla at all, they’re Carnivora. I would imagine the reason they have similar parasites is more because many have both herbivore and carnivore stages than any common inheritance.
You’re absolutely right. I’m a terrible speller and I was cutting and pasting. I was attempting to say that bears and pigs are placental mammals (Placentalia?). Then I went on a bit of a tangent with pigs and whales with Artiodactyla.
Sorry if my post had some critical errors that completely changed the meaning. That’s totally on me for not proof reading it better.
