Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
Lamarck - was right!
S
S
Breaking news re evolution
- Thread starter Shilasdair
- Start date
brighteyes
Pooh-Bah
And what leads you to this conclusion?
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
How kind of you to ask.
Well, I have been reading the barefoot brigade's theories, that if you change a horse's environment, it will show individual adaptations, in this case by growing perfect hooves.
And Lamarck believed animals could not only adapt their organs through use or disuse during their lifetime, but pass the changes on to their offspring.
In keeping with the barefoot research techniques, I have studied Wikipedia in depth to find this perfect description;
1.In every animal which has not passed the limit of its development, a more frequent and continuous use of any organ gradually strengthens, develops and enlarges that organ, and gives it a power proportional to the length of time it has been so used; while the permanent disuse of any organ imperceptibly weakens and deteriorates it, and progressively diminishes its functional capacity, until it finally disappears.
And this ties in beautifully with some posts today which suggest that shoeing causes necrosis, tissue death, and presumably the complete disappearance of hooves.
Down with Darwin!
S
Jesstickle
Well-Known Member
Ooo. You know about Lamarck. How exciting. I tried to say this on a bare thread about someone who knew how to read a journal and I got told off so I am preparing to be jumped on.
We were just talking about the necks of giraffes at work last week!
We were just talking about the necks of giraffes at work last week!
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
Please note I have quoted no scientific journals - not one!
Instead, I have spoken to them from the great source of universal truth - Wikipedia.
I am now considering how to explain some aspects of physics to barefooters - feel free to help.
S
Jesstickle
Well-Known Member
Sorry Shils, I don't understand physics. I am a lowly molecular biologist (with a bit of genetics thrown in at degree level). What could I possibly know about evolution or inheritance let alone physics?
brighteyes
Pooh-Bah
Excellent news and the very perfect theory which I intend to prove. My mare has just (opportunely and very coincidentally) ripped the shoe off her slightly less well-formed hoof and I intend to leave it off til it regrows into the perfect shape. I'll then take the other shoe off the more conventionally shaped foot - if it hasn't disappeared in the meantime - and hey presto! I think?
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
Aw, don't feel bad.
Not everyone can be a barefoot trimmer - it takes weeks of training.
Just you keep watching/measuring those giraffe necks.
S
Jesstickle
Well-Known Member
TBF some of the barefooters are perfectly nice and reasonable. They just seem to get drowned out by the pushier ones.
Clearly, and in accordance with Lamarckism, being a bare foot advocate leads to you developing the ability to shout loudly about the same thing over and over
Clearly, and in accordance with Lamarckism, being a bare foot advocate leads to you developing the ability to shout loudly about the same thing over and over
use a name
Well-Known Member
How kind of you to ask.
Well, I have been reading the barefoot brigade's theories, that if you change a horse's environment, it will show individual adaptations, in this case by growing perfect hooves.
And Lamarck believed animals could not only adapt their organs through use or disuse during their lifetime, but pass the changes on to their offspring.
In keeping with the barefoot research techniques, I have studied Wikipedia in depth to find this perfect description;
1.In every animal which has not passed the limit of its development, a more frequent and continuous use of any organ gradually strengthens, develops and enlarges that organ, and gives it a power proportional to the length of time it has been so used; while the permanent disuse of any organ imperceptibly weakens and deteriorates it, and progressively diminishes its functional capacity, until it finally disappears.
And this ties in beautifully with some posts today which suggest that shoeing causes necrosis, tissue death, and presumably the complete disappearance of hooves.
Down with Darwin!
S
Can i just point out in reply to your first bit,iv never said changing a horses environment leads to good feet.Simply that shoes are bad and damage feet. Environment has nothing to do with it as far as im concerned.
brighteyes
Pooh-Bah
Now I have a massive dilemma, as I'm pretty sure that it was a crap farrier to blame for my horse's flat foot with its dodgy angle. Now I feel really bad 
Since one foot is OK and one isn't, do I let a farrier do the good one and a barefoot trimmer do the other? Til they match? Then what?
Since one foot is OK and one isn't, do I let a farrier do the good one and a barefoot trimmer do the other? Til they match? Then what?Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
How can I formulate a scientific argument against the intellectual gravitas of 'shoes are bad'?
And I'm giving up trying to explain the force of gravity to you; I know when I'm beat.
S
cptrayes
Well-Known Member
1.In every animal which has not passed the limit of its development, a more frequent and continuous use of any organ gradually strengthens, develops and enlarges that organ, and gives it a power proportional to the length of time it has been so used; while the permanent disuse of any organ imperceptibly weakens and deteriorates it, and progressively diminishes its functional capacity, until it finally disappears.
S
I think that you will find that the phrase "in every animal" means every species, not every individual animal. And that the disappearance of an organ in a species takes place over a very protracted time period, if at all (it would require an advantageous genetic mutation to remove an organ completely, whether it had any function or not). And requires evolution to have a free hand.
So long as men breed horses selectively with a requirement to have a hoof to nail a shoe to, there will continue to be hooves on horses to shoe. I think you can see the point if you imagine a foal born with no hooves. It does not seem likely to me that this creature would live long enough to breed.
But I stand to be corrected and in any case it's perfectly obvious that in time horses will evolve wheels - much more effective
Last edited:
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
Now I have a massive dilemma, as I'm pretty sure that it was a crap farrier to blame for my horse's flat foot with its dodgy angle. Now I feel really bad
It seems to me that the following scenarios are possible;
1. You remove shoes and your horse is lame without them.
Analysis: the barefoot brigade (BB) were right - shoeing masks lameness.
2. You remove shoes and your horse is sound without them.
Analysis: the barefoot brigade (BB) were right - your horse didn't need shoes.
3. You remove shoes and your horse grows perfect new ones.
Analysis: the barefoot brigade (BB) and Lamarck were right - horses create their own perfect feed, they even adapt to new environments.
4. You remove shoes and your horse grows dreadfully squint and misshapen ones.
Analysis: the barefoot brigade (BB) were right - your horse is growing misshapen feet to cleverly compensate for hidden musculo-skeletal issues that you were too stupid to be aware of.
I think that clarifies things.
S
brighteyes
Pooh-Bah
Extending Lamarck's 'theory' brings up some very thought-provoking stuff, unless there's no point because something might have already reached its predestined final state. And how can you tell?
use a name
Well-Known Member
How can I formulate a scientific argument against the intellectual gravitas of 'shoes are bad'?
And I'm giving up trying to explain the force of gravity to you; I know when I'm beat.
S
Hehe,i know how you feel.And how can us barefooters convince you?Just isnt gonna happen is it.Might as well agree to disagree
Booboos
Well-Known Member
I've never contributed to the barefoot threads as I know almost nothing about the topic, but the only little thing I thought I knew was that it's all a question of environment. From Xenophon's advice for putting down a pebble surface to studies of wild horses who roam over a variety of terrains, I thought the whole point was that the rounding of the hoof needed for brilliant bare feet comes from moving on diverse environments. I am totally confused now!
Saucisson
Well-Known Member
Not true at all - Lamarck was spot on.
A stallion at our yard grows a fifth leg every time he's in the warm-up ring before a competition. He has obviously evolved it over time to aid his balance and improve his performance as he has a tendancy to swing it from side to side as he moves.
A stallion at our yard grows a fifth leg every time he's in the warm-up ring before a competition. He has obviously evolved it over time to aid his balance and improve his performance as he has a tendancy to swing it from side to side as he moves.
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
I think that you will find that the phrase "in every animal" means every species, not every individual animal. And that the disappearance of an organ in a species takes place over a very protracted time period, if at all (it would require an advantageous genetic mutation to remove an organ completely, whether it had any function or not). And requires evolution to have a free hand.
So long as men breed horses selectively with a requirement to have a hoof to nail a shoe to, there will continue to be hooves on horses to shoe. I think you can see the point if you imagine a foal born with no hooves. It does not seem likely to me that this creature would live long enough to breed.
But I stand to be corrected
No, in Lamarckian evolutionary theory, every animal does mean every individual, so every giraffe could stretch his/her neck longer during his/her lifetime if the need arose, and could then pass that altered trait on to its offspring.
I think you are confusing Lamarck's theory with Darwin's theory, a more widely accepted one.
S
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
I imagine that you can tell by using the following rule of thumb;
Owned by a believer in shoeing - not at predestined final state of perfection.
Owned by a barefoot believer - at predestined final state.
I imagine the BB are the ones who determine it.
S
Allover
Well-Known Member
Not true at all - Lamarck was spot on.
A stallion at our yard grows a fifth leg every time he's in the warm-up ring before a competition. He has obviously evolved it over time to aid his balance and improve his performance as he has a tendancy to swing it from side to side as he moves.
Excellent
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
Hehe,i know how you feel.And how can us barefooters convince you?Just isnt gonna happen is it.Might as well agree to disagree
Ah, but two of my three horses are unshod.
You can convince me by producing;
a. Evidence that an identical grand piano with rubber leg tips of 1kilo weighs less than a grand piano with metal leg tips of 1kilo.
b. Producing peer-reviewed scientific articles of RCTs of unshod/shod horses with appropriate controls in place, using statistically significant numbers.
S
use a name
Well-Known Member
Yes i suppose you could say that environments make a difference,but the main point iv been making is just that shoes damage hooves.I see what your saying though,and it all helps/shapes what the horses hooves are like.
cptrayes
Well-Known Member
It seems to me that the following scenarios are possible;
1. You remove shoes and your horse is lame without them.
Analysis: the barefoot brigade (BB) were right - shoeing masks lameness.
2. You remove shoes and your horse is sound without them.
Analysis: the barefoot brigade (BB) were right - your horse didn't need shoes.
3. You remove shoes and your horse grows perfect new ones.
Analysis: the barefoot brigade (BB) and Lamarck were right - horses create their own perfect feed, they even adapt to new environments.
4. You remove shoes and your horse grows dreadfully squint and misshapen ones.
Analysis: the barefoot brigade (BB) were right - your horse is growing misshapen feet to cleverly compensate for hidden musculo-skeletal issues that you were too stupid to be aware of.
I think that clarifies things.
S
Shils I think this is really funny and had to laugh.
But I do want to point out that it is only you who has used the expression "too stupid to be aware of" in relation to hidden musculo-skeletal issues. It would be easy to read what you have written and assume that barefooters were both rude enough and stupid enough to suggest that anyone should have been able to see them without sophisicated gait analysis, xray, gamma ray scintigraph or MRI scanning. This isn't the case of course and I hope that you are happy to have that impression corrected.
use a name
Well-Known Member
How does the Lamarck theory have anything to do with shoeing horses anyway?His theory was to do with ''environment gives way to changes in animals''.The only changes in horses now is that we look after them,in comparison to being wild.But why does this mean they must be shod?
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
Ah, cptrayes, you should know me well enough by now to know that I have an evil sense of humour.
Some (see what I did there) barefooters are quite rude and quite stupid, but I agree that I wasn't quoting any particular rude/stupid individual in my helpful
post to Brighteyes above.(You could have fixed my 'feed' typo though
).S
Allover
Well-Known Member
Ah, but two of my three horses are unshod.
You can convince me by producing;
a. Evidence that an identical grand piano with rubber leg tips of 1kilo weighs less than a grand piano with metal leg tips of 1kilo.
b. Producing peer-reviewed scientific articles of RCTs of unshod/shod horses with appropriate controls in place, using statistically significant numbers.
S
Surely having a peice of metal attached to anything increases the force with which it can strike something otherwise why are hammers used instead of a piece of plain wood? This must also work with the concussive forces travelling back into the horses limb, we all know that getting kicked by a horse with shoes is far worse than being kicked by horse with no shoes.
Working horses on many differing types of ground works on strengthening all of the horses musculo-skeletal system and not just the feet and decreases the likelihood of injury.
cptrayes
Well-Known Member
Shils I've often thought you should have a career in writing - TV or radio definitely, maybe Julie Birchill type stuff in a paper. It would keep you out of mischief, maybe
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
Being kicked by a shod horse is worse, but not because the force is greater; it is just concentrated on a smaller area.
You know - the 'fat girl in stilettos on your foot' incident when clubbing.
And hammers are used to prevent the piece of wood splintering and dissipating the energy -presumably you don't want a hoof splintering in the same way?
S
Allover
Well-Known Member
Being kicked by a shod horse is worse, but not because the force is greater; it is just concentrated on a smaller area.
You know - the 'fat girl in stilettos on your foot' incident when clubbing.
And hammers are used to prevent the piece of wood splintering and dissipating the energy -presumably you don't want a hoof splintering in the same way?
S
I am going to test this theory but walloping myself about the head with a rubber pipe and then with a metal hammer, both with identical load bearing surface, i will let you know how i get on later