Re: Ant-mimick spider

On 2007-06-23, rmj <glenna@xxxxxxx> wrote:

"Mark VandeWettering" <wettering@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:slrnf7pg2b.2vqt.wettering@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 2007-06-22, rmj <glenna@xxxxxxx> wrote:

"Tony Raymonds" <tony2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3M0eZWvVB7eGFwF2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In article <jiGei.6636$tb6.3003@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, rmj
<glenna@xxxxxxx> writes
Good nutrition is a requirement, but not sufficient to explain the
recent
growth. Children are aware, consciously or unconsciously, that tall
people
gain more respect than short people; and this can cause the hormonal
change.

<snip>

If you deny that an child's mind can influence his/her growth, then you
are
incorrect.

This is news to me but I'm willing to keep an open mind . Some
questions:

1) If children could mentally control their growth then why are there
short children who would desperately like to be taller and too tall
people
who would have liked to have picked when they stopped growing?

I was referring to unconscious influence.

How is such a notion testable. Let's gather a bunch of children together.
We can obviously measure their heights, perhaps at a bunch of times. How
are we to determine what proportion of their growth is due to their
unconscious desire to be taller?

A comparison of identical twins separated at birth would provide some info.

Really? How? Assume twin A is 1" taller than twin B". What test can we
perform to determine whether this difference is due to the unconscious desire
of twin A to be taller compared to same desire in twin B?

But you are right, it would be difficult to test although it is not
inconceivable that psychologists could come up with profiles that could be
plotted against the height relative to the parent's height.

But you know of no such test. In fact, you have no reason to believe what
you claim, you are simply enamoured with the sound of your own voice.

2) Since most children in a society would be subject to the same social
pressure to be tall then one would assume that they will all be growing
as
fast as their nutrition and genes will allow. How was the mental factor
you described separated out?

I do not deny the influence of genes, and believe they have greater
influence than the unconscious on height. But a small increase or
decrease
in hormone production will have effects, and why can't an individual's
mind
influence this.

You are rather shifting your goalposts aren't you? You asserted that
conscious or unconsciously, children could change their hormone output.
Now, you are merely asking "why couldn't this happen?" I take this
as a tacit admission that you are talking out of your ass, and have no
evidence whatsoever to back up your rather nutty idea.

The explanation based on improved nutrition fails.

Says whom?

In America the generation of the sixties was taller than their
parents and the generation of the nineties taller than theirs, yet
the nutrition of the latter was not better (and perhaps due to junk
food, it was worse).

There is at least one other explanation at work: sexual selection.

Another possible explanation that fails is that being short was
better for working the soil, but city kids get taller with each
generation.

You really don't know how this whole evolution thing works, do you?

Since I see no physical explanation that can explain the
continuing increase in height, I am forced to concede that it is a
social/psychology phenomena.

You might want to look up "argument from incredulity" and ponder how
it applies to your conclusion.

In addition, height is only one of a multitude of possible
concerns to the child's mind and could easily be negated by something
more
pressing.

Your notion would seem to be unfalsifiable. And it is unsupported by
any kind of evidence. And it's just nutty.

Have scientists even looked into it?

Yes. They have. It's why there is no recommended psychotherapy that will
cure or control diabetes.

I don't understand why you find it nutty that the mind can influence
physiology. Placebo effect. Psychosomatic influence.

3) Have tall people have suddenly gained additional respect in the last
few hundred years to explain the extra height people have gained? Was
there less respect for tall people in the past?

Yes they have. For peasants working the land, height was not of much
value,
perhaps even a negative. But the media, starting with novels and art and
today the movies and television nearly always have tall protagonists. And
the ubiquity of sports adds to this.


4) If this was an ability that could be turned off and on under mental
rather than genetic control then it suggests that the fashion for tall
people changes too rapidly for genes to cope i.e. it would suggest that
smallness were sometimes desirable rather than tallness. Is this
correct?

It's not conscious and the genetic control is strong.

It would seem your theory is that a person's ability to control their
height isn't actually under their control. This seems somewhat less
astonishing than your original claim, because in fact it is meaningless.

If the mind does indeed influence development, it is not a meaningless fact.

But you have no evidence that it can. In fact, there would appear to be
no test that could be performed that would indicate what you claim, since
we have no diagnostic way to discover the unconscious desire of someone
to be taller, and use that to extract how much taller they are as the result.

And I discount conscious control because what children actually attempt it,
and if they did how would they go about it.

Most kids who want to grow taller eat their vegetables like their
parents tell them to. The resulting increase in height could perhaps
be claimed to be caused by a conscious effort, but it would be somewhat
misleading.

5) Can you give links to any papers or reputable web sites which support
the interesting theory you described?

No.

You might ask yourself why you bother to hold a belief that nobody else
does.

You can't speak for everyone else. Is it scientific dogma that the mind
cannot influence development?

It isn't dogma, but there is no evidence to support such a notion. In
particular, your claim would appear to be unfalsifiable, which makes
consideration of it rather a waste of time.

Mark





Mark



--
tony2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx





.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Ant-mimick spider
    ... Children are aware, consciously or unconsciously, that tall ... short children who would desperately like to be taller and too tall ... I was referring to unconscious influence. ... the "unconscious desire to be tall" is in any individual, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ant-mimick spider
    ... Children are aware, consciously or unconsciously, that tall ... This is news to me but I'm willing to keep an open mind. ... If children could mentally control their growth then why are there ... I was referring to unconscious influence. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ant-mimick spider
    ... Children are aware, consciously or unconsciously, that tall ... If children could mentally control their growth then why are there ... short children who would desperately like to be taller and too tall ... I was referring to unconscious influence. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ant-mimick spider
    ... Children are aware, consciously or unconsciously, that tall ... short children who would desperately like to be taller and too tall ... influence than the unconscious on height. ... children could change their hormone output. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Kris Hirsts page on Why Dont We Call Them Cro-Magnon Anymore? updated
    ... post was being used to support the idea of giants. ... CONCEIVABLE that all those tall skeletons we found were not the norm ... that they were any taller than we are now... ... Because it is perfectly conceivable that a population of cro-magnon ...
    (sci.archaeology)