Evolution

Advances in the investigation of the physical universe we live in.

Evolution

Postby Heracleum Persicum » Thu Jun 13, 2013 11:55 am

.




How we will look like in 100,000 years




.

[..]

Kwan based his theories on the accepted idea that between 800,000 and 200,000 years ago, the Earth underwent a period of fluctuation in its climate, which resulted in a tripling of the human brain, as well as skull size. Scientists agree that the rapid changes in climate may have created a favorable environment for those with the ability to adapt to new challenges and situations.

This trend has noticeably continued, for British scientists have found that modern humans have less prominent features and higher foreheads than people during medieval times.

“My goal is to get people talking and thinking about things they otherwise wouldn't have. For example, this 'Future Face' project is getting people talking about whether or not something like 'Gattaca' may happen,” Lamm told FoxNews.com, referring to the 1997 movie starring Ethan Hawke.

Some have criticized Dr. Kwan for appearing to ignore common scientific knowledge. Such 100,000 year projections are “fantasy,” Razib Khan, a geneticist, told Matthew Herper of Forbes.

"This is more of a speculative look than a scientific look into one possible future where human engineering replaces natural evolution in determining human physiology, but we have been very happy that our humble project has garnered so much attention and provided a platform for others share their own vision of the future," Kwan said, according to Lamm.

.





.
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
 
Posts: 8692
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Parodite » Thu Jun 13, 2013 7:35 pm

Wondered if ever a 3D graph has been plotted with the volume of all organic life in total over 4 billion years... and a guesstimate of how many fossils (or other traces) have actually survived, and have been found of the total.

I imagine that the found fossils are like a couple of small dots plotted in a volume of thousands of cubic kilometers. Such a representation would make it more obvious why many evolutions of species are so hard to trace and connect because of 99,9999999999.....9 % of them fossils are simply not found and/or even not available to begin with.
User avatar
Parodite
 
Posts: 4174
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Miss_Faucie_Fishtits » Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:34 pm

here ya go.........

Image

for the rest of it, adjust the chroma settings for your monitor.....;>...........
User avatar
Miss_Faucie_Fishtits
 
Posts: 889
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 9:58 pm

Belief in Evolution versus National Wealth

Postby Endovelico » Tue Jan 20, 2015 2:04 pm

Image

Are the US fit to be an imperial power?... :twisted:

Actually I'm delighted to see that more than 60% of people in Portugal seem to know what evolution is?...Higher than in Switzerland and Austria... Or they just flipped a coin and got lucky?... :twisted:
User avatar
Endovelico
 
Posts: 3048
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby noddy » Tue Jan 20, 2015 2:07 pm

the northern germanics as always, punching above their weight on all measures :mrgreen:
noddy
 
Posts: 5418
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Doc » Thu Mar 12, 2015 1:19 am

Now that is "All you can eat Shrimp"

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-bri ... feet-long/
Prehistoric Jumbo Shrimp Grew To Be 6 Feet Long

By Carl Engelking | March 11, 2015 1:00 pm


Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services 43

abenmoule
An artist’s reconstruction of a newly discovered prehistoric sea creature that swam the oceans some 480 million years ago. (Credit: Marianne Collins, ArtofFact)

Life in prehistoric oceans could be pretty terrifying. Take for instance the predatory jumbo shrimp that roamed the oceans 480 million years ago.

But a newly discovered species of the giant arthropods is more of a gentle giant. Aegirocassis benmoulae, identified from fossils found in Morocco, was a 6-foot-long filter feeder that supported its massive heft by skimming the oceans for plankton. That makes it one of the biggest arthropods ever found, and also the first-ever giant filter-feeder.



Large and In Charge

A. benmoulae belongs to a group of prehistoric, top-of-the-food-chain predators called anomalocaridids. These creatures grew to be two to six feet in length and had segmented, spiny bodies. Most used two thorny frontal limb-like structures to snatch and kill worms and other prey.

These early ancestors of crustaceans, insects and other modern arthropods dominated the seas during the Cambrian and Ordovician periods, 540 to 480 million years ago. A. benmoulae appears to be one of the last of the anomalocaridids.


Standing Out

A. benmoulae differs in one key way from typical anomalocaridids: While most were hunters, A. benmoulae appears to have used a basket-like filter-feeder at its head to catch plankton. The filter-feeder is akin to the plankton-panning mouths of modern baleen whales, indicating that the two lineages separately converged on the tactic.


Smaller and more ancient filter-feeding anomalocaridids have been discovered, but A. benmoulae is substantially larger. That’s probably thanks to plentiful food: the Ordovician period saw an explosive growth in plankton and consequently many new types of filter feeders evolved. Researchers published their findings Wednesday in the journal Nature.

Researchers believe the A. benmoule fossil represents the last of its kind, however. For those who like swimming, perhaps that wasn’t such a bad thing.
The classes and the races to weak to master the new conditions of life must give way {..} They must perish in the revolutionary holocaust --Karl Marx
User avatar
Doc
 
Posts: 7903
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Nonc Hilaire » Thu Mar 12, 2015 2:08 am

BIG EASY BARBECUE SHRIMP
For 4 (based on ½ pound of shrimp per person)
2 lbs Gulf shrimp (or 13-15U/lb size Tigers)
WET/FRESH FLAVORINGS
½ lb Butter/margarine
½ cup Canola oil
1 tsp Tabasco sauce (to taste)
1 tsp Liquid smoke
½ tsp Lemon juice
2 tsp Worcestershire sauce
3 tsp Crushed garlic (fresh preferred, but powdered okay)
6 oz Beer/white wine/shrimp stock/water/chicken stock
¼ cup Fresh chopped parsley (or 1 tsp dried)
DRY FLAVORINGS
2 tsp Cayenne pepper (or less for less burn)
2 tsp Black pepper
1 tsp White pepper
1 tsp Salt
1 tsp Ground thyme
½ tsp Ground oregano
½ tsp Ground basil
1 tsp Paprika
1 tsp Ground rosemary
3 tsp Onion powder
1-1/2 Bay leaves (dried finely crushed)
Night before Serving:
Rinse shrimp (you can devein if you want) and drain in colander. While shrimp drains, whirl dry flavorings in mini-chopper or blender until pulverized into fine powder. Combine all the wet and dry flavorings in a saucepan, and heat on a low burner until butter is melted. Mixture will look dark and glossy. Stir often. When butter is completely melted, set sauce aside and let cool. Meanwhile, layer shrimp in a deep bowl. Pour cooled sauce over shrimp. Cover and refrigerate until ready to cook the next day. Stir occasionally.
Day of Serving:
Heat oven to 325°F. Spread marinated shrimp in shallow baking pan. Pour any remaining sauce over shrimp. Bake until shrimp turn pink, turning every 10 minutes until done (no more than 30 minutes). Serve in deep bowls with slices of crusty French baguettes to soak up sauce. Also good over hot, steamed rice. (You can also cook individual portions on stove top in black frying pan; just make sure each portion has enough sauce to dip bread.)
This is a messy, finger-lickin’ good one-bowl dish best served for a crowd who isn’t wearing their Sunday best, or isn’t fussy about shelling their own shrimp. Cover the table with newspapers and have lots of napkins on hand. Give everyone a finger bowl with warm water and a soft towel.

From http://www.cookbookpeople.com/blog/2010 ... irst-time/
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
 
Posts: 3982
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Evolution

Postby Doc » Thu Mar 12, 2015 3:28 am

^^^^^^

Man that makes my mouth water just reading the recipe
The classes and the races to weak to master the new conditions of life must give way {..} They must perish in the revolutionary holocaust --Karl Marx
User avatar
Doc
 
Posts: 7903
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Nonc Hilaire » Thu Mar 12, 2015 3:51 am

Doc wrote:^^^^^^

Man that makes my mouth water just reading the recipe

Be sure to leave the heads on the shrimp. That is where all the flavor comes from.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
 
Posts: 3982
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Evolution

Postby noddy » Thu Mar 12, 2015 4:02 am

does seem tasty, a good evolution on the butter/garlic/brandy classic and all the best ones are variations on classics.
noddy
 
Posts: 5418
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Typhoon » Thu Mar 12, 2015 4:59 pm

Gives new meaning to the term "jumbo shrimp"

Image
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Nonc Hilaire » Thu Mar 12, 2015 6:39 pm

No problem. Snap off the head, peel off the first three segments and pinch at the base of the telson.

Image
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
 
Posts: 3982
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Evolution

Postby Typhoon » Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:57 pm

Science | Researchers may have solved [part of the] origin-of-life conundrum

The origin of life on Earth is a set of paradoxes. In order for life to have gotten started, there must have been a genetic molecule—something like DNA or RNA—capable of passing along blueprints for making proteins, the workhorse molecules of life. But modern cells can’t copy DNA and RNA without the help of proteins themselves. To make matters more vexing, none of these molecules can do their jobs without fatty lipids, which provide the membranes that cells need to hold their contents inside. And in yet another chicken-and-egg complication, protein-based enzymes (encoded by genetic molecules) are needed to synthesize lipids.

Now, researchers say they may have solved these paradoxes. Chemists report today that a pair of simple compounds, which would have been abundant on early Earth, can give rise to a network of simple reactions that produce the three major classes of biomolecules—nucleic acids, amino acids, and lipids—needed for the earliest form of life to get its start. Although the new work does not prove that this is how life started, it may eventually help explain one of the deepest mysteries in modern science.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Evolution

Postby Yukon Cornelius » Mon Jun 29, 2015 3:42 pm

It's been years since we had a good bickerfest on this.

Wanted to revisit Darwinian mechanism sufficiency -- not to break things (Lenski) or produce cyclical variations in finch beaks -- but the ability to create new information/species/anything.

Still blue sky?
User avatar
Yukon Cornelius
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 9:06 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Typhoon » Tue Jun 30, 2015 6:11 am

Yukon Cornelius wrote:It's been years since we had a good bickerfest on this.

Wanted to revisit Darwinian mechanism sufficiency -- not to break things (Lenski) or produce cyclical variations in finch beaks -- but the ability to create new information/species/anything.

Still blue sky?


http://www.talkorigins.org

What do you have an issue with specifically?
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby noddy » Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:29 am

Yukon Cornelius wrote:It's been years since we had a good bickerfest on this.

Wanted to revisit Darwinian mechanism sufficiency -- not to break things (Lenski) or produce cyclical variations in finch beaks -- but the ability to create new information/species/anything.

Still blue sky?


nothings changed in those years, the evidence you dont accept is still the evidence you dont accept.

which is nice.
noddy
 
Posts: 5418
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Simple Minded » Tue Jun 30, 2015 1:54 pm

noddy wrote:
Yukon Cornelius wrote:It's been years since we had a good bickerfest on this.

Wanted to revisit Darwinian mechanism sufficiency -- not to break things (Lenski) or produce cyclical variations in finch beaks -- but the ability to create new information/species/anything.

Still blue sky?


nothings changed in those years, the evidence you dont accept is still the evidence you dont accept.

which is nice.


truly, the science is settled. Ahhhhh... feels good.
Enquiring minds want to know. And if we don’t know, or can't know, then we’ll just imagine or project.
Simple Minded
 
Posts: 6310
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 1:24 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Yukon Cornelius » Tue Jun 30, 2015 7:44 pm

Typhoon wrote:...
What do you have an issue with specifically?

There's nothing to take issue with -- we can observe variations in finch beaks, watch chemical pathways break using darwinian mechanisms (Lenski's bacteria line, antibiotic resistance in other cases). Observation tells us that Darwinian mechanisms are sufficient for this sort of thing. What I was wondering is if I'm missing any observable evidence that Darwinian mechanism are capable of anything more. I've been off in my bubble -- are demonstrations/modeling of anything more?

The best I can tell the argument is still from inference. (and I couldn't care less about the argument from inference on this -- people will argue about that until Doomsday -- it's its own thing)
User avatar
Yukon Cornelius
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 9:06 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Typhoon » Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:19 am

Yukon Cornelius wrote:
Typhoon wrote:...
What do you have an issue with specifically?

There's nothing to take issue with -- we can observe variations in finch beaks, watch chemical pathways break using darwinian mechanisms (Lenski's bacteria line, antibiotic resistance in other cases). Observation tells us that Darwinian mechanisms are sufficient for this sort of thing. What I was wondering is if I'm missing any observable evidence that Darwinian mechanism are capable of anything more. I've been off in my bubble -- are demonstrations/modeling of anything more?

The best I can tell the argument is still from inference. (and I couldn't care less about the argument from inference on this -- people will argue about that until Doomsday -- it's its own thing)


Well, there is also the key point that no one has come up with an alternative hypothesis to evolution that can account for the observational data: both the fossil record and the genetic tree of life.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby noddy » Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:55 am

noddy
 
Posts: 5418
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Yukon Cornelius » Wed Jul 01, 2015 12:16 pm

Typhoon wrote:Well, there is also the key point that no one has come up with an alternative hypothesis to evolution that can account for the observational data: both the fossil record and the genetic tree of life.

Yes... Bush of life... but that goes right back to inference. Inference is fine, but Evolution is spoken of as a thing, not just an idea. "Look at what Evolution has done..." "Evolution caused Giraffe necks to..." "As firmly esatblished as the law of Gravity..." and so on. Using language that way makes Darwinism a mythology -- or worse -- that when we speak about Evolution we're literally talking about nothing. (the actual physical process - NOT - the idea of the process)
User avatar
Yukon Cornelius
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 9:06 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Yukon Cornelius » Wed Jul 01, 2015 12:24 pm

noddy wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotreme

Here, noddy we'll link ourselves to death :twisted:

http://youtu.be/QDQ0NJQ_z3U
User avatar
Yukon Cornelius
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 9:06 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby noddy » Wed Jul 01, 2015 12:54 pm

thats why i thought it was pointless, because it is.

you wont discuss the existance of creatures that are half mammal half dinosaur and dont fit into the simple groups you love so much.

how can i even bother continuing unless we can start at the start, lets ignore all the missing link fossil nonsense and blind watchmaker nonsense, lets stick to living creatures in my backyard.
noddy
 
Posts: 5418
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Typhoon » Wed Jul 01, 2015 2:53 pm

Yukon Cornelius wrote:
noddy wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotreme

Here, noddy we'll link ourselves to death :twisted:

http://youtu.be/QDQ0NJQ_z3U


Indeed.

Irreducible Complexity and Intelligent Design

A misunderstanding of the 2nd law of thermodynamics by the proponents of irreducible complexity is not a basis for an argument.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Evolution

Postby Yukon Cornelius » Wed Jul 01, 2015 4:13 pm

Right all around.

But I really, really, really really -- really -- don't want to argue inference here.

I'm looking for a sufficient observable mechanism to do the amount of work/information generation that Evolution needs.
User avatar
Yukon Cornelius
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 9:06 pm

Next

Return to Science + Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest