Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Dinoflagellate cysts are like fertilized eggs in animals
41 views
Skip to first unread message
drose...@yahoo.com
Jun 16, 2013, 12:07:27 PM6/16/13
to
Somebody, which is a pronoun not a name, pointed out that two haploid cells of dinoflagelletates come together to form a diploid cyst. He then misstated my understanding of the theory as saying that in the first animal, the diploid cells came together to form aggregate bodies.
This is not how I picture the aggregate body of the first animal coming together. The aggregate body of the first animal didn't form from multiple cysts. The "cyst", which in now called a fertilized egg, reproduces asexually for a few generations. The main difference between a dinoflagellate and the first animal would be that the cells during this asexual stage stick together.
This is how modern animals, including human beings, grow. Each cell in somebodies body is the descendent of one cell which is a fertilized egg. It is this cell which is homologous to a cyst.
There are a few differences between the cyst of a dinoflagellate and the fertilized egg of an animal. For instance, the dinoflagellate cyst is covered with a wax that is tougher than teflon. The animal egg often has a yolk that provides food while the embryo is growing. If somebody disputes me as to the possibility of each these having a common ancestor, then I can present several conjectures involving small mutations as to how this came to be.
There are organisms where the diploid cells, or more elaborate cells, come together to form a larger organisms. Slime molds are famous for this.
Slime molds are highly developed amoeba which have several stages of growth. Slime-molds are not in the lineage that led to human beings. However, they are interesting because they demonstrate another type of multicellularity. They are unicellular cells in amoeboid form that occasionally mass together to form a merge-monster (slug). The merge-monster eats other microorganisms that are in the area.
Sex occurs in the merge monster. Most of the nuclei in the merge monster remain intact. However, some haploid cells undergo fusion within the merge monster. In fact, slime molds often have more than two genders! Some species have up to five genders. So some slime molds have triplod, quatroploid, or pentaploid stages of life. The diploid stage of life in animals and plants is just the simplest and most common way of having sex.
The merge-monster turns into a vegetative growth. It looks just like an individual mold. You could even say it resembles a mushroom! Each zygote is packed in a spore which eventually gets blown into the wind. Eventually, it lands somewhere else. If conditions are better than where it started, it multiplies asexually into independent haploid cells.
So the scenario which somebody misrepresented as my own really takes place. However, it does not take place in animals or true plants. It takes place in slime molds. However, somebody wanted to know about animals. So I will go back to animals after this post.
Let me explain why I am starting a new thread. I don't particularly like starting new thread. However, the old thread had posts that were too long. On rereading a long post recently, I found one point that I forgot to address. It is easy to do when the posts get too long. Yet, I want very much to answer somebody's question.
This can't be done without either breaking my oath or starting a new thread. I have sworn not to clip any of somebody's posts. Unfortunately, the moderator seems to be censuring those posts of somebody which are too long. Therefore, I am going to try to answer somebody's question by starting a new thread without directly copying any quote of yours. This enables me to keep my promise literally without "clipping somebody's post" and without even mentioning his name. After all, a word that isn't capitalized is not a name.
Obviously, the moderator can't allow a thread to continue where none of the posters clips posts. Many other posters have pointed this for their own self interest, since they want to have their say. Some of them say it in a way that sounds like jest. However, the survival of the thread requires that posters work together.
This may not be in the spirit of my oath or forum rules. However, this tactic technically keeps my promise while technically conforming to forum rules.
When the moderator reads posts that are too long, then he will censure them again. I want to reassure somebody that won't be because the contents were threatening. And it won't be because I am not interested in the topic.
This is not how I picture the aggregate body of the first animal coming together. The aggregate body of the first animal didn't form from multiple cysts. The "cyst", which in now called a fertilized egg, reproduces asexually for a few generations. The main difference between a dinoflagellate and the first animal would be that the cells during this asexual stage stick together.
This is how modern animals, including human beings, grow. Each cell in somebodies body is the descendent of one cell which is a fertilized egg. It is this cell which is homologous to a cyst.
There are a few differences between the cyst of a dinoflagellate and the fertilized egg of an animal. For instance, the dinoflagellate cyst is covered with a wax that is tougher than teflon. The animal egg often has a yolk that provides food while the embryo is growing. If somebody disputes me as to the possibility of each these having a common ancestor, then I can present several conjectures involving small mutations as to how this came to be.
There are organisms where the diploid cells, or more elaborate cells, come together to form a larger organisms. Slime molds are famous for this.
Slime molds are highly developed amoeba which have several stages of growth. Slime-molds are not in the lineage that led to human beings. However, they are interesting because they demonstrate another type of multicellularity. They are unicellular cells in amoeboid form that occasionally mass together to form a merge-monster (slug). The merge-monster eats other microorganisms that are in the area.
Sex occurs in the merge monster. Most of the nuclei in the merge monster remain intact. However, some haploid cells undergo fusion within the merge monster. In fact, slime molds often have more than two genders! Some species have up to five genders. So some slime molds have triplod, quatroploid, or pentaploid stages of life. The diploid stage of life in animals and plants is just the simplest and most common way of having sex.
The merge-monster turns into a vegetative growth. It looks just like an individual mold. You could even say it resembles a mushroom! Each zygote is packed in a spore which eventually gets blown into the wind. Eventually, it lands somewhere else. If conditions are better than where it started, it multiplies asexually into independent haploid cells.
So the scenario which somebody misrepresented as my own really takes place. However, it does not take place in animals or true plants. It takes place in slime molds. However, somebody wanted to know about animals. So I will go back to animals after this post.
Let me explain why I am starting a new thread. I don't particularly like starting new thread. However, the old thread had posts that were too long. On rereading a long post recently, I found one point that I forgot to address. It is easy to do when the posts get too long. Yet, I want very much to answer somebody's question.
This can't be done without either breaking my oath or starting a new thread. I have sworn not to clip any of somebody's posts. Unfortunately, the moderator seems to be censuring those posts of somebody which are too long. Therefore, I am going to try to answer somebody's question by starting a new thread without directly copying any quote of yours. This enables me to keep my promise literally without "clipping somebody's post" and without even mentioning his name. After all, a word that isn't capitalized is not a name.
Obviously, the moderator can't allow a thread to continue where none of the posters clips posts. Many other posters have pointed this for their own self interest, since they want to have their say. Some of them say it in a way that sounds like jest. However, the survival of the thread requires that posters work together.
This may not be in the spirit of my oath or forum rules. However, this tactic technically keeps my promise while technically conforming to forum rules.
When the moderator reads posts that are too long, then he will censure them again. I want to reassure somebody that won't be because the contents were threatening. And it won't be because I am not interested in the topic.
Bob Casanova
Jun 16, 2013, 2:16:12 PM6/16/13
to
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
Does your newsreader support word wrap?
--
Bob C.
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov
appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
Does your newsreader support word wrap?
Bob C.
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov
jillery
Jun 16, 2013, 3:16:39 PM6/16/13
to
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:16:12 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
wrote:
>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
>
>Does your newsreader support word wrap?
He might be using New GG.
wrote:
>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
>
>Does your newsreader support word wrap?
drose...@yahoo.com
Jun 16, 2013, 3:54:52 PM6/16/13
to
On Sunday, June 16, 2013 2:16:12 PM UTC-4, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Darwin123:
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>
I thought that my lines were short enough to appear on screen without
truncation. However, I don't have tabs to indicate how long they really are.
I have to guess lengths. I don't see how it appears in the horizontal
direction.
I don't see my hard returns. When looking at a line, I can't determine
that a particular line ended with a hard rather than a soft return. So
when I forget, I have no way to correct it.
I used to try to clip posts to keep individual posts short in the
vertical direction. However, somebody complained. So I now I try not to.
Are my lines trailing off the screen in the horizontal direction?
Anyway, this is relevant in more ways than one. We were discussing
what limits the size of a monoclonal colony. So how is this analogy.
What limited monoclonal colony size in the beginning was death. Colonies
that got too big died because of an uncontrolled mutant or collapsed under their own ecological weight. This is analogous to having the moderator ban
the thread. However, later monoclonal colonies used their intercellular
communication cells for quorum testing. Quorem testing replaced early death. Now, colonies would die at an advanced age because of senescence rather than
at an early age due to uncontrolled growth.
The individual cells stopped multiplying after the colony got to be a
certain size, but did continue to change as they did before they were a
colony. The timing in the changes changed so that the stages of development
became tissues.
I put hard returns at the end of lines. How did I do? Did any lines
trail off the page or get chopped early?
How many characters should go on a line?
If I could count characters, then I could do better. However, I don't
know how long a line is supposed to be.
Earle Jones
Jun 16, 2013, 5:31:06 PM6/16/13
to
In article <06ae0cfe-58fd-409a...@googlegroups.com>,
drose...@yahoo.com wrote:
[...]
>
> When the moderator reads posts that are too long, then he will censure
> them again. I want to reassure somebody that won't be because the
> contents were threatening. And it won't be because I am not interested in
> the topic.
>
*
I think you mean 'censor' and not 'censure'.
"usage: Both censor and censure are used as both verbs and nouns, but
censor means Śscrutinize, revise, or cut unacceptable parts from (a
book, movie, etc.)ą or Śa person who does this,ą while censure means
Ścriticize harshlyą or Śharsh criticismą: the inmates received their
mail only after prison officials had censored all the contents; some
senators considered a resolution of censure to express strong
disapproval of the president's behavior."
--New Oxford American Dictionary
earle
*
drose...@yahoo.com wrote:
[...]
>
> When the moderator reads posts that are too long, then he will censure
> them again. I want to reassure somebody that won't be because the
> contents were threatening. And it won't be because I am not interested in
> the topic.
>
I think you mean 'censor' and not 'censure'.
"usage: Both censor and censure are used as both verbs and nouns, but
censor means Śscrutinize, revise, or cut unacceptable parts from (a
book, movie, etc.)ą or Śa person who does this,ą while censure means
Ścriticize harshlyą or Śharsh criticismą: the inmates received their
mail only after prison officials had censored all the contents; some
senators considered a resolution of censure to express strong
disapproval of the president's behavior."
--New Oxford American Dictionary
earle
*
Bob Casanova
Jun 17, 2013, 1:30:11 PM6/17/13
to
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 15:16:39 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:16:12 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>>appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
>>
>>Does your newsreader support word wrap?
>
>
>He might be using New GG.
Seems so; at least the headers seem to support that
conclusion.
<snip GG-mangled post>
in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:16:12 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>>appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
>>
>>Does your newsreader support word wrap?
>
>
>He might be using New GG.
conclusion.
<snip GG-mangled post>
Bob Casanova
Jun 17, 2013, 1:39:02 PM6/17/13
to
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:54:52 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
>On Sunday, June 16, 2013 2:16:12 PM UTC-4, Bob Casanova wrote:
>> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>>
>> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Darwin123:
>>
>>
>>
>> Does your newsreader support word wrap?
Apparently I was mistaken, and you're using GurgleGroups
(which isn't actually a "newsreader" per se, but a Web-based
access to Usenet). The "new" GG seems to have multiple
problems, two of the most annoying of which are failure to
allow wrap and the insertion of extra lines in posts.
<snip>
>No. However, I have tried to put hard returns at the end of my lines.
>
> I thought that my lines were short enough to appear on screen without
>truncation. However, I don't have tabs to indicate how long they really are.
>I have to guess lengths. I don't see how it appears in the horizontal
>direction.
>
> I don't see my hard returns. When looking at a line, I can't determine
>that a particular line ended with a hard rather than a soft return. So
>when I forget, I have no way to correct it.
>
> I used to try to clip posts to keep individual posts short in the
>vertical direction. However, somebody complained. So I now I try not to.
>
> Are my lines trailing off the screen in the horizontal direction?
Sometimes; it varies.
> Anyway, this is relevant in more ways than one. We were discussing
>what limits the size of a monoclonal colony. So how is this analogy.
>
> What limited monoclonal colony size in the beginning was death. Colonies
>that got too big died because of an uncontrolled mutant or collapsed under their own ecological weight. This is analogous to having the moderator ban
>the thread. However, later monoclonal colonies used their intercellular
>communication cells for quorum testing. Quorem testing replaced early death. Now, colonies would die at an advanced age because of senescence rather than
>at an early age due to uncontrolled growth.
>
>
> The individual cells stopped multiplying after the colony got to be a
>certain size, but did continue to change as they did before they were a
>colony. The timing in the changes changed so that the stages of development
>became tissues.
>
> I put hard returns at the end of lines. How did I do? Did any lines
>trail off the page or get chopped early?
>
> How many characters should go on a line?
>
> If I could count characters, then I could do better. However, I don't
>know how long a line is supposed to be.
I don't think there's an actual standard; I have Agent set
to word-wrap lines to 60 characters or less.
appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
>On Sunday, June 16, 2013 2:16:12 PM UTC-4, Bob Casanova wrote:
>> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>>
>> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Darwin123:
>>
>>
>>
>> Does your newsreader support word wrap?
(which isn't actually a "newsreader" per se, but a Web-based
access to Usenet). The "new" GG seems to have multiple
problems, two of the most annoying of which are failure to
allow wrap and the insertion of extra lines in posts.
<snip>
>No. However, I have tried to put hard returns at the end of my lines.
>
> I thought that my lines were short enough to appear on screen without
>truncation. However, I don't have tabs to indicate how long they really are.
>I have to guess lengths. I don't see how it appears in the horizontal
>direction.
>
> I don't see my hard returns. When looking at a line, I can't determine
>that a particular line ended with a hard rather than a soft return. So
>when I forget, I have no way to correct it.
>
> I used to try to clip posts to keep individual posts short in the
>vertical direction. However, somebody complained. So I now I try not to.
>
> Are my lines trailing off the screen in the horizontal direction?
> Anyway, this is relevant in more ways than one. We were discussing
>what limits the size of a monoclonal colony. So how is this analogy.
>
> What limited monoclonal colony size in the beginning was death. Colonies
>that got too big died because of an uncontrolled mutant or collapsed under their own ecological weight. This is analogous to having the moderator ban
>the thread. However, later monoclonal colonies used their intercellular
>communication cells for quorum testing. Quorem testing replaced early death. Now, colonies would die at an advanced age because of senescence rather than
>at an early age due to uncontrolled growth.
>
>
> The individual cells stopped multiplying after the colony got to be a
>certain size, but did continue to change as they did before they were a
>colony. The timing in the changes changed so that the stages of development
>became tissues.
>
> I put hard returns at the end of lines. How did I do? Did any lines
>trail off the page or get chopped early?
>
> How many characters should go on a line?
>
> If I could count characters, then I could do better. However, I don't
>know how long a line is supposed to be.
to word-wrap lines to 60 characters or less.
jillery
Jun 17, 2013, 2:01:29 PM6/17/13
to
On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:30:11 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
><snip GG-mangled post>
wrote:
>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 15:16:39 -0400, the following appeared
>in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>
>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:16:12 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>>>appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
>>>
>>>Does your newsreader support word wrap?
>>
>>
>>He might be using New GG.
>
>Seems so; at least the headers seem to support that
>conclusion.
Yeppers. If so, he could switch to old GG with very little effort.
>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 15:16:39 -0400, the following appeared
>in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>
>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:16:12 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>>>appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
>>>
>>>Does your newsreader support word wrap?
>>
>>
>>He might be using New GG.
>
>Seems so; at least the headers seem to support that
>conclusion.
><snip GG-mangled post>
Earle Jones
Jun 17, 2013, 2:00:07 PM6/17/13
to
In article <6thur8hon20fgtv9r...@4ax.com>,
*
My "wrap-width" is set to 72 characters. I use the Mac NewsReader
MT_NewsWatcher, written by folks at Northwestern University. I've used
it for probably 15 years or more and it is **very** reliable.
earle
*
My "wrap-width" is set to 72 characters. I use the Mac NewsReader
MT_NewsWatcher, written by folks at Northwestern University. I've used
it for probably 15 years or more and it is **very** reliable.
earle
*
drose...@yahoo.com
Jun 18, 2013, 8:48:09 AM6/18/13
to
On Sunday, June 16, 2013 12:07:27 PM UTC-4, drose...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Somebody, which is a pronoun not a name, pointed out that two haploid cells
of dinoflagelletates come together to form a diploid cyst. He then misstated my
understanding of the theory as saying that in the first animal, the diploid
cells came together to form aggregate bodies.
I suggested step dinoflagellates for stage 1. The unicellular ancestor of all animals is somewhat like a dinoflagellate.
> Somebody, which is a pronoun not a name, pointed out that two haploid cells
of dinoflagelletates come together to form a diploid cyst. He then misstated my
understanding of the theory as saying that in the first animal, the diploid
cells came together to form aggregate bodies.
I now introduce my candidate to stage 2. The aggregate cell ancestor of
all animals is somewhat like choaoflagellate. Some choanoflagellate species
form an aggregate made of unspecialized cells.
Here is a link. Note the phtotograph of Sphaeroeca looks a lot like the
aggregate of stage 2 in the Wiki article on the Evolution of
Multicellularity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choanoflagellate
�The choanoflagellates are a group of free-living unicellular and colonial
flagellate eukaryotes considered to be the closest living relatives of the
animals. As the name suggests, choanoflagellates (collared flagellates) have a
distinctive cell morphology characterized by an ovoid or spherical cell body
3�10 �m in diameter with a single apical flagellum surrounded by a collar of
30�40 microvilli (see figure). Movement of the flagellum creates water currents
that can propel free-swimming choanoflagellates through the water column and
trap bacteria and detritus against the collar of microvilli where these
foodstuffs are engulfed. This feeding provides a critical link within the
global carbon cycle, linking trophic levels. In addition to their critical
ecological roles, choanoflagellates are of particular interest to evolutionary
biologists studying the origins of multicellularity in animals. As the closest
living relatives of animals, choanoflagellates serve as a useful model for
reconstructions of the last unicellular ancestor of animals.
�
number of species such as those in the genus Proterospongia form simple
colonies,[2] planktonic clumps that resemble a miniature cluster of grapes in
which each cell in the colony is flagellated or clusters of cells on a single
stalk.[3][10]�
Bob Casanova
Jun 18, 2013, 2:18:53 PM6/18/13
to
On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:01:29 -0400, the following appeared
in the near future; at least, that's been the claim I've
read here.
in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:30:11 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 15:16:39 -0400, the following appeared
>>in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:16:12 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>>>>appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
>>>>
>>>>Does your newsreader support word wrap?
>>>
>>>
>>>He might be using New GG.
>>
>>Seems so; at least the headers seem to support that
>>conclusion.
>
>
>Yeppers. If so, he could switch to old GG with very little effort.
But I understand that Gurgle is going to remove that option
>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:30:11 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 15:16:39 -0400, the following appeared
>>in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:16:12 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>>>>appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
>>>>
>>>>Does your newsreader support word wrap?
>>>
>>>
>>>He might be using New GG.
>>
>>Seems so; at least the headers seem to support that
>>conclusion.
>
>
>Yeppers. If so, he could switch to old GG with very little effort.
in the near future; at least, that's been the claim I've
read here.
jillery
Jun 19, 2013, 12:22:35 AM6/19/13
to
On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:18:53 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
to it.
Of course, Google can remove old GG whenever they want, but they seem
to be in no hurry about it. In the meantime, there is no good reason
to use new GG, and plenty of good reasons to avoid it.
wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:01:29 -0400, the following appeared
>in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>
>>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:30:11 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 15:16:39 -0400, the following appeared
>>>in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:16:12 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>>>>>appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>Does your newsreader support word wrap?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>He might be using New GG.
>>>
>>>Seems so; at least the headers seem to support that
>>>conclusion.
>>
>>
>>Yeppers. If so, he could switch to old GG with very little effort.
>
>But I understand that Gurgle is going to remove that option
>in the near future; at least, that's been the claim I've
>read here.
I don't mean to be shallow, but he should cross that ford when he gets
>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:01:29 -0400, the following appeared
>in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>
>>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:30:11 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 15:16:39 -0400, the following appeared
>>>in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:16:12 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>>>>>appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>Does your newsreader support word wrap?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>He might be using New GG.
>>>
>>>Seems so; at least the headers seem to support that
>>>conclusion.
>>
>>
>>Yeppers. If so, he could switch to old GG with very little effort.
>
>But I understand that Gurgle is going to remove that option
>in the near future; at least, that's been the claim I've
>read here.
to it.
Of course, Google can remove old GG whenever they want, but they seem
to be in no hurry about it. In the meantime, there is no good reason
to use new GG, and plenty of good reasons to avoid it.
Bob Casanova
Jun 19, 2013, 2:14:17 PM6/19/13
to
On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 00:22:35 -0400, the following appeared
>Of course, Google can remove old GG whenever they want, but they seem
>to be in no hurry about it. In the meantime, there is no good reason
>to use new GG, and plenty of good reasons to avoid it.
I can definitely agree with that. In fact, I see no good
reason to use GG at all, given the availability of free news
servers and free newsreaders, unless one habitually posts
from public computers such as those in libraries.
in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:18:53 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:01:29 -0400, the following appeared
>>in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:30:11 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 15:16:39 -0400, the following appeared
>>>>in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:16:12 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>>>>>>appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Does your newsreader support word wrap?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>He might be using New GG.
>>>>
>>>>Seems so; at least the headers seem to support that
>>>>conclusion.
>>>
>>>
>>>Yeppers. If so, he could switch to old GG with very little effort.
>>
>>But I understand that Gurgle is going to remove that option
>>in the near future; at least, that's been the claim I've
>>read here.
>
>
>I don't mean to be shallow, but he should cross that ford when he gets
>to it.
Do *not* go there; one idiotic thread is sufficient! ;-)
>On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:18:53 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:01:29 -0400, the following appeared
>>in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:30:11 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 15:16:39 -0400, the following appeared
>>>>in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:16:12 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
>>>>>>appeared in talk.origins, posted by drose...@yahoo.com:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Does your newsreader support word wrap?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>He might be using New GG.
>>>>
>>>>Seems so; at least the headers seem to support that
>>>>conclusion.
>>>
>>>
>>>Yeppers. If so, he could switch to old GG with very little effort.
>>
>>But I understand that Gurgle is going to remove that option
>>in the near future; at least, that's been the claim I've
>>read here.
>
>
>I don't mean to be shallow, but he should cross that ford when he gets
>to it.
>Of course, Google can remove old GG whenever they want, but they seem
>to be in no hurry about it. In the meantime, there is no good reason
>to use new GG, and plenty of good reasons to avoid it.
reason to use GG at all, given the availability of free news
servers and free newsreaders, unless one habitually posts
from public computers such as those in libraries.
0 new messages