the return of Lamarck, sort of, and other arcane topics

Flabbergasting to read the two NY Times stories about the function of what was formerly considered "junk DNA," to trigger different biochemical reactions by determining how and in what sequence the DNA strands are activated; the flabbergasting part being that the inheritance of these genetic switches is influenced by the father's life experiences, which alter his biochemistry due to anything from prolonged stress to type of diet...and these genetic alterations, once inserted into the DNA, persist at least into the second generation of inheritors, the grandchildren as well as the children. hence the rise of neo-Lamarckianism; you can't pass on acquired characteristics per se, but you can pass on the good or bad things they do to your body while you are acquiring them.

I would write numerous other commentaries were there world enough and time (to quote the all too familiar phrase) but there isn't, and I am not. In more ways than one.

I could list the several things I won't be commenting on, but that is a bit of comedy in which I would rather not engage (if not an impertinence up with which I will not put, as Churchill or somebody said once to a pretentious grammarian).