
Honey, we shrunk the food -- really, really fast - chaostheory
http://www.sciam.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=honey-we-shrunk-the-foodreally-real-2009-01-15
======
jballanc
Never underestimate the power of unintended consequences and faulty
assumptions. Setting minimum size on fish caught, for example, is intended to
protect the young and, hopefully, still virile individuals so that they can
sustain the population.

Did you catch the faulty assumption? Small != Young (at least, not
necessarily...)

~~~
tdavis
They're pretty much all faulty assumptions since they're predicated on the
notion that an animal outside of the food chain can do something to avoid
affecting it. From farming wildlife to completely eliminating countless
species on a daily basis... what the hell do people expect? Everything to
magically work out?

We are a part of the global ecosystem only insofar as we are physically in it;
we don't interact with the biological community the way any other creature
does. Of course we're going to fuck it over. Hopefully I'll be dead before
we've completely eliminated it.

------
bprater
As usual, we won't care until it's too late.

That will be the history of our human civilization, too obsessed about today,
never being truly serious about our future generations.

~~~
shaunxcode
All those years of trying to "be here now" seem to have back fired then?

~~~
misuba
Right, because hippies totally invented consumerism.

------
spydez
See also this Newsweek article, "It's Survival of the Weak and Scrawny", which
is about hunting elk and other large game.

<http://www.newsweek.com/id/177709>

------
jyothi
Quite alarming.

"Unlike, say, wolves or lions, which target the smallest, weakest members of a
group", that too because we are equipped with artificial power. However I
wonder why this phenomenon did not happen with herbivorous chain. I can't
comment if rabbits and elephants would pick the smaller plants or the
healthier ones. But it seems intuitive to pick the healthier ones here. May be
that is why I am the evil human.

~~~
anewaccountname
Edible plants for the most part _rely_ on being eaten to spread their seeds,
so if animals did, it wouldn't matter. Humans gathering wild berries on the
other hand eat them and then "spread" their seeds into some chemical filled RV
toilet.

------
tapinko
Reverse Evolution?

~~~
LogicHoleFlaw
No, just Evolution.

~~~
gravitycop
_Generational change via selection_ is not the same thing as _evolution_.

~~~
scott_s
Yes, that's exactly what it is.

edit: Evolution also includes genetic drift - random chance mutations not
driven by selection. But the point is _evolution_ is not synonymous with
_progress_.

