note Re: Short Sun blog

Jane Delawney · 26 Sep 2010, 01:46 · from 2010-September.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: jane_delawney at sky.com (Jane Delawney)
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:46:48 +0100
Subject: (urth) note Re:  Short Sun blog
In-Reply-To: <4C9BD20F.3000106 at io.com>
References: <SNT123-W14E46C1DFCF66B5AA337A2CF610 at phx.gbl>	<4C9AFB49.3030405 at io.com>	<4C9BC641.9050008 at sky.com>
	<4C9BD20F.3000106 at io.com>
Message-ID: <4C9EA608.2080802 at sky.com>

On 23/09/10 23:17, Jeff Wilson wrote:
>
> The rejection issues are swept with the same hand wave that includes 
> all the sublime biological technology on Urth. The old autarch's 
> detail on the way the analepict works includes a transfer of brain 
> cells that take up residence within the recipient; this along witht he 
> physican at the ziggurat's repeated use of a single donor implies a 
> rejection solution so robust that no prior preparation (other than the 
> one dose) and no regimen afterward is needed and the concern is passe. 
> So indeed Typhon would be free to chose his donor from all his slaves, 
> not just those who are part of his alleged clone cohort.
OK, got all that, and granted; but the point I was attempting to address 
was not re: the notion of clones/'test tube (human) babies' or a 
putative clone cohort (of which I know nothing!), but re: Typhon 
possibly being /nonhuman/, which was someone else's hypothesis entirely 
- was it Lee's, or are we all actually arguing with the blog writer? 
I've kind of forgotten in the twists and turns of this conversation.

On this point only then (Typhon's possible nonhuman origin) -  the 
transfers/transplants mentioned in this post (Jeff's, the one quoted) 
are all within the human species. In other words, these examples all 
support my point and in fact if anything tell /against/ the notion that 
Typhon might be of unUrthly origin.

I know it wasn't you (Jeff) that advanced the notion that Typhon might 
not be human, and in fact we agree I think.

regards

jd















>
> Jonas is an example of a similar rejection-passe scenario: apparently 
> the hollow androids' remnant occupant-serving features include some 
> kind of physical as well as inductive interface to let the man operate 
> the limbs after trauma, that has been reversed to let the limbs 
> operate the man in the shepherd's case.
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20100926/0d65e26b/attachment.htm>

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net