CattleMan1920
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2018
- Messages
- 2,028
- Reaction score
- 10
Ebenezer said:Dr. Bonsma was a scientist. A renown scientist. He did not make errors about tectonic plates in case BR has another anti-science example to school us on and to use as fluff.Science doesn't lie.
If so (and we have had this technology for more than 2 years now) why is the AAA having to change indices to move breeders away from creating terminal and non-fertile cattle right now? A little Bonsma look would have culled the culprits years ago without the current rush to repair. That was easy.Angus has more than 1 million blood samples, they are constantly being analyzed by computers with sophisticated algorithms, not in a zillion years could you or I be able to compute the combinations.
I'm sure he understood the animal A to Z, but he would never have been able to map the genome and use genomic enhanced EPD's to create a better animal. What once took 15 years can be done in 2 with AI and ET.
Again, eyeballing a cow and saying "that cow is fertile" is an amazing talent, I have to agree. Or in regards to a bull, saying "just by looking at this bull, I know he will transmit, this or that"
I'm not doubting that he had talent, that is obvious.
The only way I would have been convinced is if he had been able to look at a heifer for example, and with a high degree of accuracy, describe that heifer's traits without looking at her EPD profile and ending up within a very close margin of what the actual genomic-enhanced EPD's show.
Of course that would be like someone looking at a car engine and guessing the horsepower rating. They might know right off hand how many cylinders, but everything inside could still be a mystery.
I love the writings of Charles Darwin, but I don't think he understood science as it is presented today. Maybe I am wrong.