On Wed, 28 Aug 1996, Richard Lawson wrote:

Ranma Al'Thor wrote:

I must with regret, launch a barrage of criticism at this story, with the
understanding that I am not a specialist in any of the things I'm talking
about, so I could be wrong...

You're just getting back at me for all the nasty things I said about
DnU, aren't you?  ^_^   Okay, just kidding.

No.  I didn't write that :)
 

I find it implausible that a virus could be created that would only slay
livestock.  Most viruses are confined to single species.  Of course, they
could also create multiple viruses for different species, which would be
more plausible.

Well, we are talking about twelve years in the future.  If you consider
how vastly technology has imporved between 1984 and now, think of how
it'll be in 2008.  Especially in genetics.

Yeah, but will technology of this level be easily available to a tiny 
group of nutcases?  Genetic laboratories aren't exactly a dime a dozen...


 > > Also, AIDS 
isn't a very good analogy.  > 

It wasn't meant to be an analogy in terms of how it kills, but in how
difficult it is to find a cure.

Also, if it spreads so quickly and is so unstoppable, I'm rather 
surprised it didn't escape their labs while they were still trying
to develop it.  (A la the Stand...)  

Well, I think minimal precautions can go a long way towards preventing
unwanted spread of the virus too soon.  I don't think this is too big a
stretch of the imagination.

Then why couldn't the virus be stopped once it was released?

You portrayed it as totally unstoppable.  No measure could save the 
targets from infection...I can't see why it didn't escape before they 
spread it to super-virulence...how does this thing propogate, anyway?
 

Basically, this virus stretched the bounds of believability too far for
me.  If nutcases could create that...why couldn't/haven't nutcases
unleashed some super human slaying virus in this future?  

Ever seen the movie "Twelve Monkeys"?  The postulate exactly that
scenario.  My hope is that those with access to the technology to
produce such viruses can be detected for signs of homicidal tendencies. 

No way.  If people could get the technology to make a virus to kill 
cattle, then some fruitcakes who want humanity dead could get it and 
would.  Luckily, real viruses are never THAT bad.  Even the black plague 
only killed one third of the european population.  

And far too many people wiht homocidal tendencies conceal them 
well...That's why serial killers don't get caught after the first murder.

Genetics research at this level is expensive and delicate, and I'd 
expect it to continue to be so, at least at the level of creating 
super-viruses...

My rationale for this (I intended to include it in the story but
couldn't find a convenient way to do so) is that someone who knows how
to create such a virus also can engineer it in such a way that it can
hide its tracks - i.e. destroy itself as soon as the cattle is dead,
mutate to a seemingly innocuous form until it comes in contact with a
certain kind of DNA, etc.  That was why finding the lab was so important
- if they could see how it was made, they'd be able to find a cure
quickly.  Now, it's like seeing a bottle of beer come out of the brewery
and trying to find a way to recreate it without being able to see inside
the building.  'Taint easy.

 Beer can't be made to self-reproduce in a lab :)
I don't see how you'd make a virus able to disguise itself eitehr...They 
don't have some way to set a switch to detect, "Oh my host is dead.  Oops."

They just die when their tiny little lifespan runs out if they can't 
reproduce...which they need a living host to do.  Genetics does have its 
limits...

 

And Pigs would not be able to replace THOSE needs.  Pigs are good for one
thing:  Eating.  Pigs don't pull plows, provide large quantities of milk,
etc, etc.  They are the most efficient source of meat, but many of the
animals slaughtered by this virus met other needs as well (Especially
cattle)

I do find it hard to believe that animals are used to produce food other
than through their own bodies.  Even in the most economically
disadvantaged country, you'll find plenty of tractors.  Those that do
use animals to grow crops don't produce enough food to really make a
difference - most crops are grown with the use of machines.

Most CASH crops.  Things like Tea, etc.  The average subsistence farmer 
still uses Draft animals in the third world.  Mechanization is heavily a 
first/second world phenomenon.


You see, Tractors cost big bucks, and most of the worlds farmers are dirt 
poor.

Go talk to a geography teacher...like my mom :0
She pounded these things into my heads.   

Imagine a world without wool, leather, or draft animals?  Starvation
wouldn't be a problem in the Us and rich countries...And the harvest
already planted would be gatherable in in the poorer ones...it would be
the next year when the ability of third world farmers to plant crops
would be crippled by a lack of draft animals that all hell would truly
break loose...

I did indicate that the world is still reeling from the after-effects of
the virus - I didn't want to indicate that pigs magically solved all the
problems.  Just most of the major ones.

Well, I didn't get that perception from the story.
I got the impression of "Whoops, we have pigs who don't die, problem goes 
away."

 

The vats couldn't produce nearly enough fish to feed the word - and what
about the chemicals necessary to grow all these creatures?  They could
only last so long. (I meant to have Dr. Johnson comment on this, but
forgot).

To reiterate:  the vats only produce the seeds that world uses to
replenish its crops (if you'll forgive me changing from the animal to
plant kingdom in this analogy).

YEs, but all the other breeding stock is dead or dying...a few thousand 
pigs aren't going to make a difference fast enough.

Not if the food value of the pigs is what  is important...and fish have a 
lot faster breeding cycle than pigs.
 

(As a piece of writing, this is good as always, but as an academic, it's
my job to complain about these sorts of things :))

:)  Thanks for the kind words about writing.  I admit to taking the most
chances with this story; I somewhat feared an uprising of vegetarians to
appear at my door with pitchforks and torches.  I also made several
large assumptions that I hoped my readership would forgive; if I tried
to explain and rationalize them all, the story would quickly be bogged
down and lose its focus.  I hoped people would put their "Star Trek"
blinders on. (I mean really; how is it remotely possible that the
transporter works as it does?  Without even a receiving station, no
less.)  I hope for the forgiveness given to most sci-fi works:  In the

Who knows :0  Star Trek is three centuries in the future.  Besides, Star 
Trek is full of magic masquerading as Technology.  I simply regard it as 
such.  Not to mention "energy beings" who are actually Gods and Faeries...:)




John Walter Biles :  MA-History, Ph.D Wannabe at U. Kansas         
ranma@falcon.cc.ukans.edu      bailesu@komodo.hacks.arizona.edu  
http://www.hacks.arizona.edu/~bailesu/falcon.html 
http://www.dhp.com/~wraven/john/index.html
"It's good to kill the King."  "I still think the Saxons should have 
put a higher price on our heads.  I'm more valuable than 25 librum."
--Frequent quotes from our PENDRAGON sessions.