A Station Eight Fan Web Site
Ask Greg Archives
Gargoyle Biology
Archive Index
: « First : « 25 : Displaying #186 - #210 of 263 records. : 25 » : Last » :
Posts Per Page: 1 : 10 : 25 : 50 : 100 : All :
Punchinello writes...
As long as I'm on the subject of clones...
I've noticed you've been fielding questions about the clones unique coloration. I think at least one person made the observation that there were other structural differences as well. Different types of horns or fins. Different types of builds to the extent that you could interpret some skeletal differences. And maybe I'm crazy, but I would swear I remember Lexington's clone having a spiked ball at the end of his tail?
Now, I don't read fiction (even in a cartoon) in a manner that compels me to think the author must have some kind of explanation for this change. I interpreted it as artistic license. The clones looked like creative variations on a visual theme. They were fun. Interpreting the show as reality, set to film, inspires people to demand to know exactly what obscure feature of "gargoyles science" makes this happen though. I don't think I really like the way it's assumed that a clone of an organism would replicate the donor organism in every detail. That's probably another idea borrowed from star trek.
The concencus right now seems to be that the clones features were altered by a side effect of being rapidly aged in tubes. (They do that with beer now, you know.) However, it's occurred to me that there might be a much more plausible and more interesting explanation. The clones features could have far less to do with the fact that they're clones, than it does with the fact that they're clones of gargoyles.
When an organism is being put together at the molecular level, the process is working against certain forces. Most obviously, gravity, but other forces as well. So there are certain mechanical limitations on the way an embryo can form in the womb. Biology confronts that by developing tissue in various ways. From a mechanical perspective, bone tissue develops by an accretionary process which is technically similar to the way a seashell would form. Muscle tissue forms a gauzy scaffold though, and then develops vasculature into the scaffold.
Ultimately, all of these mechanical processes are compelled to action chemically, by the properties of DNA. That doesn't mean that the final result would be identical for every conceivable circumstance though. Many highly ordered, developmental processes and simple, dumb forces impinge upon our development in the womb, besides the chemical synthesis of our DNA. So while my genes inform the shape of my nose, for example, they are not the only thing which begin to inform it. And some structural features in an organism are more rigidly dictated by genetics than others.
Our genes are more of a blueprint for a theme. We're one theme. I'm not suggesting that the variation could be extraordinary, as I don't want to imply that we are less indebted to our genes than we are. The variation I'm talking about amounts to some subtle changes in morphology. These changes would not always be conspicuous, but sometimes they can be glaring. The coloration of domestic cats, for instance, while informed by their genes, is the product of several developmental forces. And when you clone a domestic cat, you usually get a cat with completely different coloration than the donor. You can easily end up with a calico when you clone a black cat.
If it had been a documentary instead of a cartoon show, I would have suspected that you would get unique results from cloning a gargoyle.
Seeing a gargoyle would be professionally interesting to anyone involved in the biological sciences. But seeing a group of three or more gargoyles would be extraordinary. Even though we define species in terms of reproductive isolation these days, we still use morphology to identify them. And gargates exhibit morphology unlike any other reproductively isolated species in nature. I've mentioned before that the most interesting aspect of the gargoyles, to me, is not the "turning to stone thing," but the fact that you have the morphology of Lexington, Brooklyn, Griff, Una, and Zafiro within one reproductively isolated group.
All members of a species exhibit morphological differences. All tigers and giraffes conform to their species respective morphologies to subtly different extents. We don't usually observe the differences outside our own species, but even when we examine our species differences from person to person, barring aberrations, the changes are never more than minor cosmetic distinctions. Mostly it amounts to slightly different fatty tissue distribution in the face or melanin content in the skin. When racial confirmation is examined, it is only in terms of proportional averages of the length of the limbs to the dimensions of the torso. Even where sexual dimorphism is concerned, the primary characteristics are actually variations on the same organs. This applies to almost every animal on the planet.
When we look at the gargoyles though, they look like Darwin's grab bag. When you compare Brooklyn and Lexington, two members of a species from the same regionally isolated set of genes, you see extreme morphological differences. There is simply no way their skulls can be variations on a single blueprint. There are obvious features that they seem to have in common with each other, and with other gargoyles, that help begin to identify the common origin of their morphologies. The way their lower limbs are designed, their tails and their abdomens seem consistent. But their wings are definitely not. These could _never be_ cosmetic distinctions. These are major structural differences. The way their wings connect would necessitate completely different musculature in their upper bodies, and that, in turn, would require differences in their skeletons to provide structure for the different muscle insertions.
When you add Una and Zafiro to this picture, everything we know about the morphology of species is thrown out the window. I couldn't look at this group and reasonably expect that they even have the same number of vertebrae, let alone be members of the same species. They are unlike anything in nature. But that's not bad. It's fascinating. It gets me speculating about what cicumstances such a creature could emerge from.
One region of speculation I've been entertaining, is that if you had a species with these characteristics, it might be because their genes are arranged into a hierarchy which is different from other organisms.There could be a level of organization to the passing down of their genes beyond just sexual recombination. I'm wondering if genes could be organized into a hierarchy of sets of discrete packages. Sort of like a kit of parts. So that their genes might actually contain blueprints for morphologies for each organ, but have these blueprints disassociated from one another.
From a gene's eye view, it might appear that they were not using gargoyles as a vehicle to perpetuate themselves, but rather, a certain variety of gargoyle tails. Or a certain variety of gargoyle skulls. And each package of genes was pursuing it's reproductive agenda independently of the others, even while multiple packages end up becoming the blueprint for a single gargate.
So I'm thinking... maybe... if external pressures can be a determinant in how genes get expressed in an animal, leading to different tissue distribution in a persons nose or something, then maybe external pressures can have an effect on which "package" gets used for a tail or a set of horns in gargates. Maybe the spiked ball on the end of that clones tail (assuming I was not imagining it) is an alternate package for a tail structure which is as much a part of Lexington as the one we're used to seeing.
The point is that for tissue to take on structure as sophisticated as a spiked ball or a pair of ibex like horns, there would need to something predicating it. It couldn't just happen by accident. So I would be inclined to suppose that some feature of gargate physiology is responsible for such major morphological changes, when cloned, and that their physiology would be unique in that the expression of genes for such radical changes are as much a matter of chance as the extremely minor variations other organisms are subject to.
I have not even begun to consider how a species can exhibit morphological features which seem to be specific replicas of other creatures which they are not related to. How do you get a lion headed gargoyle?
That's sure to be an interesting thought experiment.
Greg responds...
And I'll be very interested to read what you come up with on the subject. Your posts are always fascinating. I love your "package" explanation. As I'm sure you know, I'm no scientist, but Sevarius is... so when he says the discoloration is a result of the age acceleration process, I tend to want to believe him (at least when he has no motivation to lie).
And another thought to keep in mind is that Brentwood was aged beyond Lex's age. Would Lex start to look more like Brentwood as he aged? Don't know, frankly.
But the other physical differences in the clones, as well as the multiple physical differences between gargoyles both inter-clan and intra-clan is nicely explained by the package-theory.
Good fun work!
matt writes...
Gargoyle Beasts
ok, i've been wondering about this for a long time. you've established the Gargoyle reproductive cycle and how it works and i must say its a really well constructed system. its great how a couple produces their last egg and in the following rookery their first child has its first child. works out very well.
on the other hand, you havn't given as much information on how the Gargoyle beast reproductive cycle works. you've said that Gargoyle beasts can produce children after only one generation has passed. for instance, you said that even though Bronx hatched in the rookery right before Angela's he can already mate, and Boudicca is old enough to mate with Bronx. you've also said that Gargoyle beasts can not only start breeding sooner, but also produce more than three offspring as Gargoyles do. and obviously, Gargoyle beasts have pups in the same 20 year intervals.
so my questions are, what is the Gargoyle Beast breeding cycle? how many offspring does a typical Gargoyle Beast pair produce if conditions are normal and healthy? is a pair still birthing pups in the same rookery as their older children are?
thanks alot Greg!
Greg responds...
I think you've more or lessed gleaned the short answer, here.
Beasts mature faster than Gargoyles do. But the cycle and life span are exactly the same. Thus a Beast couple is capable, generally of having one more egg than a gargoyle couple born at the same time would be.
That is, they are capable of having an egg in the cycle immediately following their own hatching.
In any case, I think that's right. I don't seem to have the brainpower at the moment to double check all the math.
Marz J.S. writes...
I looked at the FAQ page & I don't think this was asked. I was wondering, I'm curious to this, do female gargoyles have periods? You know, a monthly visiter? I've always wondered. Thank you for your time.
Greg responds...
It wouldn't be monthly, since they're not fertile that often.
Vinnie writes...
Do you remember the episode "Metamorphosis". In it Servarious theorizes that Gargoyles store solar energy during the day. However no one ever found out if it was an acurate theory or not, could you expand on this?
Greg responds...
I tend to buy into Sevarius' explanation, but we intentionally did not make it definitive, and I don't have the scientific background to defend or attack the theory. But I like it personally.
Maelgrim writes...
How much can Goliath and Demona actually lift? thier strengths seem inconsistant as in one episode Demona yanks a rock bigger then she is out of the floor yet Eliza can overpower her! as for Goliath he has to many inconsistancys to list here !
Greg responds...
I'm hoping that we achieved a basic consistency, and that factors like momentum and surprise and whether she's human or not and grip and adrenaline and whatever all explain whatever basic inconsitencies you observed.
But I'm not going to attempt to come up with a number that either character benchpresses.
ross writes...
where do gargoyles come from
Greg responds...
Eggs.
some REAL rambling...
Okay, this is not GREG SPEAKING FROM THE MOUNT...
This is just me thinking aloud. (Well, not really aloud. I'm sitting here typing.) I don't even know if I like these ideas. They're definitely not canon.
But the following notions occured to me today...
Gargoyles don't seem to have a native language. They acquire human language ... perhaps much the same way that they acquire names. Naming is clearly addictive. And language, in many ways, is just sophisticated naming.
Clearly gargoyles are just as intelligent as humans. Before humans developed tools, Gargoyles were at the top of the food chain. They may not have created/invented as much "stuff" as humans have, but they also had way fewer needs. Necessity being the mother of invention, they had less motivation for inventing sophisticated shelter, clothes, tools, etc. But that in and of itself isn't a comment on their brain-power.
So why no need for language and names?
When it comes to naming, gargoyles clearly felt that names were superfluous if not somewhat limiting, if not downright harmful to the spirit. Humans must define things. Gargoyles know that things just are.
We are friends. What other name do we require, etc.
It fits in with their animistic/monotheistic view of a higher power. A higher power that requires no name.
Does beg a question, though if you go back far enough.
Does the sky need a name? Does the river?
Elisa responds: "The river's called the Hudson."
But she could have responded: "The river's called a river."
Did the gargoyles have a language that they ABANDONED in favor of human words -- even if those human words were Atlantean (like the term "Gorlois", the true Atlantean etimology for "GARGOYLE")?
Or perhaps...
Gargoyles are so attuned to the earth. They have biological clocks that match the seasons. They have relationships that require no names, until those names have been imposed.
Is it possible, that gargoyles once... long ago... had mild psychic abilities that left them with no need to create language? It wasn't words that they intuited (or transmitted or read or whatever) but emotions, maybe images or sensations.
Maybe it was tied to magic. Not that Gargoyles are magical creatures, but if magic was free-flowing before the Will-O-The-Whisps evolved into the Children of Mab (or whomever) and somewhat confiscated that power for their own, perhaps that magic was just part of the Earth that gargoyles were so attuned to, and allowed for some psychic congress.
Or perhaps, it is a biological ability -- based on biio-elecricity and brainwaves -- that has faded with disuse. Perhaps the very language skills that Gargoyles learned from the human race dampened their psychic intuitiveness, much as Fox's natural magical abilities were stunted by her human upbringing.
Either way, it suggests that this ability could be latent.
I'm NOT saying that the gargs we know are psychic. They've all been fooled enough, even by the INTENSELY emotional Demona (who would theoretically be broadcasting as well as receiving) to bely that notion.
But I wonder if this isn't an interesting area of speculation.
If you see me at the Gathering THIS WEEKEND, it's a topic I'd be interested in discussing.
Stanley writes...
One more about the stone form...
I noticed that often times there are shots of the rising sun, but the Gargoyles remain flesh until the light rays actually hit their body. This seems to imply that it is the actual physical impact of the sun rays on their bodies that turn them to stone. But by that token, a gargoyle hiding inside a dark room with no windows would remain flesh during the day. So instead, do they have some sort of biological clock, in tune with the rotation of the earth? But that seems even too complicated for a gargoyle. I'd like to hear anything you had thought out concerning the specifics of this idea.
Greg responds...
Again, I've answered this before. I don't know what you could possibly mean by "too complicated for a gargoyle".
They do indeed have a biological clock, a pretty intense one that adjusts for the seasons, etc. Like all of us with a biological clock, one can defy it -- briefly. But an actual visual cue like the sun hitting you is a powerful psychological trigger that makes it difficult to beat the clock.
Seneth Somed writes...
Greg,
After reading a few posts in the archives concerning
whether a gargoyle's weight changes during stone sleep, I
thought about it, and I figure they stay the same weight.
For example, in the very first episode Goliath hauls five
stone gargoyles from the Viking camp to the top of the
castle. Yeah, Goliath's strong, but could he carry a ton
of uneven weight several miles, then up several flights of
stairs, then do it four more times without getting winded?
Maybe I should ask you, so
1. How strong was Goliath? Could he lift a ton? Maybe
two? Ten?!?
A better example of a stone gargoyle's weight is Broadway
turning to stone midair. Seems more plausible for a 350
pound statue to survive such a fall than a 1500 pound
statue. But enough speculation.
2. Do gargoyles stay the same weight when in stone, or do
they gain weight?
3. This has probably been asked before but... do gargoyles
change to stone through their whole bodies, or do they just
have a stone shell?
Thanks for your time. You really show some dedication by
doing this. I hope it pays off. I still can't wait to see
what happens next.
Greg responds...
1. I'm not good with numbers.
2. I don't see how they could gain weight -- laws of conservation of mass and all.
3. They change throughout into a stone-like organic substance.
Thank you.
matt and others in the Comment Room writes...
we were wondering if a gargoyles urge to protect is a natural urge or something they are taught by older generations to do, or a combination of both?
Greg responds...
I'd guess both.
Babs writes...
Ok im not gonna ask to many questions, I know your probably going crazy from all the other questions that everyone else is asking. I was reading through the archive and FAQ's to hunt to see if what I was going to ask was already answered and over 2-3 hours later when I lost all felling in my butt(shut up ;p) and my eyes about to pop out; to my dismay I didnt find the answers, unless my dumbass just didnt see them which that is probably more likley. We'll here they are
1) hmm how can I put this (no not a sex question) I was wondering what the Gargoyles skin is?... uh ours is flesh , lizards are scales, bears are fur. Now some Gargoyles you can tell what thier skin is just by looking at them, so I guess this is leaning more towards the Scotish Clan. Depending on what breed of animal they are the skin would be more harder to puncher.
2)Darn forget what episode , We'll it's the one when Owen stuck his hand in the pot of life and it turned into stone, I took notice in the rest of the shows his hand pretty much stayed in the same postition, but when watching "Broadway goes to Hollywood" he was holding a book with that hand. So my question is can he move that hand as if it wasn't stone or was that just a glitch in that episode ?
3)Regarding to question #2. When Owen turns into Puck his hand is not stone anymore, since they are 2 different people im guessing that when he's Owen he has a different body and Puck the same , but they still do share the same body, is that Pucks magic changing his hand to flesh for teaching shake ?, you can just say , sure whatever you think for this one. I don't quite know what I just asked either.
I'm one of those people that analyze everything kinda goes with the territory with having a slight case of O.C.D, ya notice things that no one else does, but kinda miss the things that are right in the open.
Danke for taking the time to answer my questions.
Gargoyles Forever !
Greg responds...
1. We always referred to it as "hide".
2. "The Price". I didn't work on "Broadway Goes To Hollywood", but that clearly is a mistake.
3. They aren't two different people. Owen is an identity that Puck can assume. When Puck returns to being Owen, he recreates the stone hand -- all part of his bargain with Xanatos.
DPH writes...
Since you have updated your timeline since you last answered the question about Angela and Ophelia possibly being "in heat" in 2008 (02-02-00), I thought I would ask that question again since that part of the timeline might have changed.
1)When is the earliest time that Angela and Ophelia could have laid an egg?
2)Will Angela, Ophelia, or both of them be capable of laying an egg in 2008?
Greg responds...
The earliest for either is 2008 and, yes, both are potentially capable of laying eggs in that year.
Another Angel writes...
If the gargoyles were not to know who their parents were... how did they prevent inbreeding?
Oh, and the Gathering was so much fun this year- can't wait for 2003!
Greg responds...
I've answered this before. Sense of smell helps. Also most (though not all) gargoyles breed among their generation, procluding a mating with any biological siblings.
Hope you enjoyed 2003. I'm looking forward to 2004.
Will writes...
Dear Greg, I was wondering how can the gargoyles gilde , like 5 feet away from lava?
Greg responds...
Hot air?
Joseph writes...
what would be the science behind how goliath and his clan glide,and climb almost anything except solid steel?
Greg responds...
Who said they can't climb solid steel?
I don't know the science. They glide on their wings. They climb with their claws. Do you need more science than that?
Faieq writes...
A while ago I noticed a short ramble of yours entitled 'While I'm thinking of it...' It was rambled on Monday 4th March 2002. I won't repeat the whole thing here, however the beginning started off with you repeating an exchange between you and Aris Katsaris concerning the date Angela and the other eggs on Avalon would have hatched and underneath your response you wrote;
"With all this in mind...
I know I've established -- both here and in my own head (particularly with regards to G2198) that eggs hatch on the Spring Equinox.
But does anyone remember whether (and where) I've established what month the eggs are laid in?
I can't recall if this has come up yet.
Anyone know? And would this solve my problems at all?"
Recently I remember another question previously submitted on Friday October 13th by Aris Katsaris that may help you.
"Aris Katsaris writes...
A small tidbit that you revealed through the last contest was that the hatching of the eggs takes place in March 21st - the Spring Equinox, that is.
Now, I always felt it would be on an equinox or a solstice- those are the only dates that make sense really... Is the laying of the eggs also done on the Spring Equinox (ten years earlier ofcourse)?
How about the egg's conceiving? Have you decided how much time is spent between the eggs's conceiving and laying?
Greg responds...
That's interesting. Maybe.
As for conception, maybe I'll make it a six month term and put it on the fall equinox.
The truth is I chose March 21st because it's my son's birthday. But sometimes things in the Garg Universe just seem to come together. It's cool that way.
recorded on 10-20-00"
From your above response I assume that the eggs would be laid on the spring equinox, with the females being fertile on the fall equinox from the previous year.
I don't know whether this would clarify any problems over when the eggs hatched, but I hope it helps.
Greg responds...
I agree, it helps. Thanks.
I also don't know if it fixes my math problems, but I'm hopeful. And I like the idea of females being in heat at the fall equinox and laying their eggs in the spring (and the eggs hatching ten years later in the spring). For a race, that is so attuned to the bio-rhythms of their planet, it just feels right.
I don't think that literally all the eggs are conceived on the EXACT same night. Same with laying. Same with hatching to some extent too. There's probably something like a three night window for these things (say, two nights on either side of the equinox).
Jimmy writes...
What's up with Desdemona's (Colfire's) wings, how come no other gargoyles have wings like her's.
Greg responds...
There is wing variation across the Gargoyle bio-community. You just haven't seen many gargoyles (not many are still alive, frankly) to know that she is not completely unique in this wing shape.
Firebird writes...
Okay, I've looked but can't find the answer.
You said that gargoyles get energy from the sun, but they also eat (at least, Broadway does), so what kind of dietary requirements would they have? ie. would a gargoyle food pyramid of what they need to eat look like one for humans (lots of starches/carbohydrates on the bottom, fruit and veg. next etc), or should they eat proportionatly more of one thing than us and less of others?
Greg responds...
I don't know. What do you think?
folklore writes...
Dear Greg, great job you deserve more compliments than i can offer, but my question is why were the gargyles from the different regions of the earth so different except for the japanese and your staring characters? well thanks for your time if i get it. bye
Greg responds...
I think the Ishimura clan was just as different from the gargs as many of the Mayan clan. I'm not going to get caught up in migration patterns or genetic explanations that are just going to trip me up later. In any case, most of the differences you observed are fairly superficial anyway.
Joshua writes...
What *exactly* makes the gargoyles turn to stone and break away from stone? They've been stone indoors, in sunlight-deprived places, and even outside in overcast. So it can't be sunlight directly... and when travelling the world, since time zones are different, it became apparent that it's not a 12-hour schedule. So it seems to be the *knowledge* of sunlight being out there... is that true?
Greg responds...
As I've stated before (in the Archives), they have an internal biological clock that keeps them quite attuned to the seasons, etc. That can be screwed up obviously by changing time zones, but I think Avalon tended to compensate a bit.
And the strong visual cue of the sun rising is still gonna tend to turn them to stone.
demona writes...
I was wondering how exactly does a gargoyle breed??
Greg responds...
More or less like a human does, but they lay eggs which take ten years to hatch.
Siren writes...
1.)Did Magus, Tom, and the Princess know Angela was Goliath and Demona's daughter?
2.)Did they know Gabriel was Desdemona's and Othello's son?
3.) Did we ever meet Ophelia's parents? Besides the Britain Clan and Zafiro, she is one of the most interesting looking.
Greg responds...
1. Given her looks and coloring, it's not a great leap.
2. Ditto.
3. I haven't given it any thought.
Joshua writes...
I apologize if this has been asked (I couldn't find it skimming): Were the Gargoyles supposedly created through evolution or magic?
If via evolution, can you explain how their "ability" to turn to stone evolved?
If via magic, when, where, how, and by whom?
Greg responds...
Depends on what you believe created humans. All I will say is that it was the same process.
Demi writes...
How many of the clan's eggs were Goliath and Demona's??
Greg responds...
I assume you're referring to the 36 eggs that Princess Katharine preserved, in which case the answer is one: Angela.
Gargoyle females only lay one egg at a time, generally.
Mooncat writes...
Hello Greg,
The subject came up in the Adult comment room on the Gargoyles Fan Website, on wether Goliath and Elisa would ever be able to become mates. Physically.
So the main question is, can they become mates, in a physical sense, without physically harming Elisa?
How well endowed is Goliath (beneath the loin cloth)?
How well endowed are Brooklyn, Broadway, and Lex? Yes, inquiring minds want to know *^_^*. If not exact sizes, some general indication would be appreciated.
Thank you for taking the time to consider the question.
Mooncat >^,,^<
and the peeps in
the Adult Gargoyles Comment Room
Greg responds...
I think of Goliath (and all the gargoyles) as being proportional. So that would make him fairly well-endowed by human standards. I have no doubt that Elisa and Goliath could become intimate, but I do have some doubts as to whether they could engage in intercourse without harming Elisa physically. But there are of course, many ways to become intimate short of intercourse.
: « First : « 25 : Displaying #186 - #210 of 263 records. : 25 » : Last » :