The Founder
|
Of every clean beast you shall take them by
sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by
two, the male and his female.
|
Genesis 7: 2
|

Since
the Babylonian exile, the
story of Noah has become a poignant symbol for the rebirth of Judaism
and the
founding of a new, cosmopolitan, people. Their true home became (and
still is)
a portable country – the Torah, Noah's Ark in the shape of a book.
For the rest of us, Noah is the second founder of life on Earth, a
second Adam.
We certainly owe the old sailor a debt of gratitude; not only for our
existence, but that he was no prohibitionist and teetotaler (Genesis 9: 21).
If the
story were true, our genes would be the testimony to the event. We have
learned to read this testimony and map out the history of the human
race since our ancestors left Africa. But it is a message that is
leaving out the great deluge.
According
to the story, the gods asked Noah to take on board of his craft pairs
of “every
clean beast by sevens” while
of the “unclean”
animals he was to take just one pair (Genesis
7: 2).
Between these two categories, this inevitably should lead to a
numerical difference not only in the rate of reproduction, but in the
number of mutations. Among the clean animals there should occur seven
times more mutations than among the unclean, while the unclean beasts,
due to inbreeding, should be plagued by a substantially larger ratio of
genetic diseases and deformities. There is an example. 12,000 years
ago, the cheetah fell victim to an epidemic – perhaps a kind of cat-flu
or the feline version of AIDS – that reduced the entire species to just
two individuals in the Kalahari, who had lived there in separation from
their species. Since then the cheetah suffers from the effects of
inbreeding. But this is just the cheetah; for the rest of the world
this never happened. What "Great Flood" are we talking about anyway?
The rising sea level after the last Ice Age?
Or
could
it
be this story is about something else entirely?
When
we
think of colonizing deep space we usually depict this exodus as
something very
similar to the heroic migrations of the Polynesians in the Pacific.
With a
difference: the Polynesian seafarers did load their outrigger vessels
with
seeds and a few domestic animals that didn’t cost them a bean. Although
never
sure that there would be anything at all beyond the horizon, they could
be
pretty certain that, if they found an
uninhabited island,
it would provide at least building materials and water, and with their
cargo of
livestock and seeds could be made inhabitable at virtually no costs at
all. Colonizing
the planets of the Alpha Centaury system in this style, on the other
hand would
run up enormous bills. It would require a flotilla of large
spacecrafts,
transporting not just the bare necessities in the hope of finding on
the
arrival a hospitable planet, it would also mean to carry a portable
version of
our entire civilization and culture. And if this venture would be a
one-way
mission, going boldly where even radio-waves
take
decades and centuries to bridge the distance, if at all, who on Earth
would be
willing to foot the bill for an investment of no possible returns?
There
is
of course a cheaper option; something a non-profit foundation might be
willing
to finance. Instead of sending people in large spacecrafts with costly
life
support systems, we send just their frozen embryos, together with seeds
and the
embryos of domestic animals. Such a vessel would be very much smaller,
and on
arrival, an on board artificial intelligence – let’s call it “mentor”
– would scout the region for a suitable planet, land the craft and
initiate the in vitro breeding of the cargo, later even teach the
toddlers the
first basics of survival. The rest they would have to find out
themselves. The
adults of this ark’s first generation may have forgotten mentor’s real
name
– “HAL 9000” – and simply call it “God.” It’s possible. Who knows! The
Sumerian kings in their cuneiform genealogies insist their ancestors
came down
to Earth from the sky.
Nothing
in their civilization suggests the degree of technology needed to
travel deep space,
but that does not mean they couldn’t have crawled out from an incubator
and
then be left to their own devices – a lack of ingenuity was not the
problem:
“And Noah began to be an husbandman, and
he planted a vineyard” (Genesis 9: 20). Then
again, it would be written all over
our gene.
There
are
live-forms prior to the “landing.” Our genes make us the member of a
large
family, every living being on Earth is related to us and 600
million years ago the ancestor of the humble cauliflower was our
closest
cousin. Which begs the question whether this universality of DNA and
RNA here
on Earth could extend to the voids of deep space? Do the creatures in
the Sloan
Nebula have the same genetic code as we do? If so, every landing on a
foreign
planet will risk the encounter with nasty bacteria, ending the mission
before it
begins. Or, the indigenous gene has evolved on a very different
chemistry. In
which case the new arrivals are safe, except for the big ugly smelliphant with foot long serrated teeth, bad breath and armor-plated scales head to tail. In
other words by
now, we, as the descendants of Noah, would notice a fundamental
difference in
the genetic makeup, between “us,” and life on Earth from before the
landing.
Again, there is no evidence.
And
yet,
when I look at my garden, at the birds chirping in the trees, at the
sleek and
neat appearance of most of our mammalian companions, domestic and wild,
I can’t
help noticing a marked improvement over the ugliness of the Jurassic.
With all
due respect to Koko, I prefer the human face to the prettiest of apes.
Call me
a species-chauvinist, but I like the way we look. Are we finding the
image in
the mirror pleasing because our tastes adapt to appearance, or has
somebody or something been messing with our gene?
Sediments
on the ocean floor indicate that there had been eight ice ages
over the last 700,000 years; a veritable engine of evolution, pumping
out
improvements of the mammalian type in quick succession. Our appearance
is part
of this story. Or was there something else?
©
– 2/28/2009 – by michael sympson, 1,100
words, all rights reserved