Evolution, Morphology and Exobiology

Hello, I've been thinking about these a lot. I was born and grown up in Asia. I moved to USA less than 5 years. And I ve been notive something here. People here have allergy with weather. Even many Asian moved here, they did not have it at the beginning, but after a while living here, they have it every time weather has change. If based on evolution theory then after a while living in same environment, they should develop ability to get adapted to the environment ? Why they did not ? People in US has allergy to many diff kind of food. I am really wonder why it happens. Some people have it since their birth, some just develop it during lifetime. That mean, you …

It seems that the people who colonized America were first stuck on the Bering land bridge for about 10.000 years, during the last glacial maximum. Genetic data shows that founding populations of Native Americans diverged from their Asian ancestors more than 25,000 years ago. This means that Native Americans diverged from their Asian ancestors long before they started to colonize America...some 15.000 years ago. http://www.livescience.com/43726-bering-strait-populations-lived.html What do you think of this hypothesis?

Many argue that there are no Mental differences across the Races. No, IQ, No behavior, etc. Of course, this makes no more sense than saying the same about the more obvious Physical Adaptations. Tthe Brain IS a physical organ as well. Saying there are no mental differences is Denying Evolution, and is just Obfuscating for the sake of PC. Crime is higher for Blacks and Hispanic not just in the USA/Nightly TV, its higher worldwide. In South America, Africa, and in those minorities even in places like the UK/London which had No slavery. ie: overall USA numbers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_a...tates#Homicide Homicide According to the US Department of Justice, bla…

Indeed we are repeating ourselves again! But it's always fun to really try to drill the actual truth into the public conciousness, in the face of determined obfuscation by so-called experts. Is "more variation within groups" a problem for other subspecies? Is it in fact normal? Is this just an ad hoc race denial fallacy only applied to humans and originating from the avowed Marxist Richard Lewontin and parrotted endlessly by social science departments? Let's take a look. Emphasis added. Wright's (inventor of F statistics) values:

Hello. I'm new to the forum. I want to talk about a controversial subject. There is an area of research known as Scientific Racism or racialism which proposes that human races differ in innate mental ability including intelligence and personality differences. I have debated this subject for years on other message boards mostly against racists who believe in the inferiority of certain races. I want to get an idea from this board of how the majority of posters here feel about this subject and what they think the truth is about the topic. Please answer the poll and give your thoughts on the topic.

G S Orf et al 2016 recently found evidence for a cysteine-mediated mechanism of excitation energy regulation in a photosynthetic antenna complex (of the green sulphur bacteria). Further findings on the specific cysteines identified in the G S Orf study highlight a possible role for cysteine residues in the redox activity of the pigment-protein complex. R Saer 2016. By specific and reversible oxidation of redox-sensitive cysteines, many biological processes sense and respond to signals from the intracellular redox environment. M Putker 2016. Other studies such as Marais 2015 have explored protective effects in other bacteria which have yet to be properly explaine…

Dear all, I have an idea to research indirect interactions of publishing affiliations - like are they competing or collaborating basing on their authors publications. Can you please tell me are there any instruments to do that? Or is there anybody interested in such research? Regards, Me

Hey guys, I was wondering, What's the importance of surfaces in evolutionary theory ? There would be two worlds on the sides of the surface each very different from the other. So wouldn't that result in faster evolution somehow ? For example say some photosynthetic bacteria were living on the surface of the earth, One environment would be the air above it with a very low density and high dynamity, While the other under it would be dense and resource rich. So wouldn't this result in the bacteria somehow evolving into multicellularity ? The ones above wouldn't have as much resources but would have access to air and the sun, While the ones under would have access to wate…

Is anyone in biology looking into Abiogenesis (origin of life events) still taking place today on Earth? I mean, why would something that happened in the past not still be taking place on Earth today within areas of the Earth that still have similar conditions to pre-life Earth. Places with volcanic activity perhaps? I've looked online for this type of research but have yet to find it. However, I find it hard to believe no one is exploring that the creation of life isn't still taking place on Earth today.

Hi All. I would like to ask as per tittle, anyone experienced with the assay, Is it possible to purify cycle sequencing pcr product using BigDye Xterminator Purification kit and which module with POP 6 (3500 XL Genetic Analyzer) should I use to run it.

Was it something like this: http://res.cloudinary.com/dk-find-out/image/upload/q_80,w_640/H_sapiens_male_f3_29189_h66jq4.png I heard that since we evolved in an infared environment, it was light and medium brown complexion, so I'm confused.

I was wondering, you hear many people deny it. For example, someone argued that it just looks like humans and apes share a common ancestor and that we actually don't. What are thoughts on these claims?

Dinosaurs probably had feathers and the ones that survived evolved to the actual birds? Why they evolved to smaller animals?

The biggest land animal today is the elephant. To walk around it got those legs like columns to support the massive weight. How it was possible for animals sometimes 5 times bigger than a elephant to stand and walk? For me something is very wrong about it. I allready asked experts in conferences and they simple ignore me. I have only 2 explanations . Or the gravity was smaller than today or the flesh and bones were lighter. When we see those slender animals with, sometimes, legs like land birds it is difficult to imagine them running around in our Earth today. The some applies to the flying pterodactyls when compared to the condor. Any ideas?

Are there creatures with semi evolved body parts present on the parent creature? In reply to this comment of which I find confusing: "people who accept evolution are the most ignorant, thick-skulled, bigoted morons to ever existthanks for proving that you are a bigot and a moron. you just love to call god a liar by accepting the evolution lie. we should see creatures with semi evolved body parts not present on the parent creature if evo was true. so far zerp evidence for evo have been found in nature." Edit: From my understanding: This is what he says we do not have any evidence of: http://genetics.thetech.org/original_news/news124 The guy doesn't understand evoluti…

Anyone know if these are more likely to carry defects than those from the egg? I've been trying to reason out why there is a selective bias against them. Only idea I've been able to come up with, besides sheer dumb luck and an overzealous protection system for the egg.

Can anyone recommend a book or two about genetics and evolution? My ideal book would be: Undergraduate level Start from microscopic description/principles of genetics (DNA, transcription etc...) and proceed through to population level genetics/evolution. Have a quantitative focus/flavour - going into reasonable detail of any mathematical/computational models used. Bonus if it includes something about modelling evolution with cellular automata. Would be nice if i could find this all in one book, or maybe a series. Thanks for any pointers.

Hello everyone, im not a scientist, not even close, but i had to find a forum of which i could post my question. Im not here to second guess Darwin's theories, yet i do find it disturbing: The famous evolution picture (monkey to man) has a couple species in between, where are they? what happened to them? Now its only the monkey and the man, also, if the whole theory is true, how come monkeys stopped evolving into the "in between" species? Im grateful for any feedback. Have a good one.

If natural selection is defined in its essence as: the process whereby organisms better adapted to their environment tend to survive and produce more offspring. Then it is fact. I think that Darwin's "natural selection" far exceeded this, and is to be negated.

What does it mean for something to be a valid concept? How is race defined? How was it defined historically? What arguments invalidate it, if any? Are there similar concepts in other species? What is your view? My position is that race was historically defined by ancestry by Darwin. He contrasted descent with modification, and descent, and stated descent alone was preferable to describe human races. Mayr later supported genetic similarity regardless of descent as more informative. Both methods in practice are similar, and genetic similarity informs phylogeny. Marxist pseudoscientists have advanced a number of fallacious or arbitrary arguments to attempt to…

Most sexual selection between species consists of the female being choosy, to find the perfect mate to offer her offspring the best chances in life for survival and to reproduce. However, in humans and other species the male also embarks into the parental offering resources, support increasing the child's chances to develop successfully. So, my question is that due to most males carrying out a parental role, does this mean that males have evolved certain instincts to also become choosy looking for certain aspects and characteristics found in other females?

Anyone would expect then, that Turkic people are Mongoloids originally. However they often feature facial features and haplogroups those more typical to Europids than Mongoloids. For example Uyghur people often look differently from Chinese. Only minority of Tatars feature well pronounced Mongoloid features. Only small minority of Turkish have haplogroups typical to Mondoloid nations (Mongolia, China). Almost all Azeri look Caucasian/Middle Easternian How could it be explained?

I read a snippet of a similar theory, and was wondering there was any truth to it. Supposedly, the genes being expressed through inbreeding that cause genetic disorders would actually eventually be culled through natural selection, and in theory, only more favorable traits would remain. So in the long term, its suggested that inbreeding in the long term could actually yield genetically superior, or at least genetically preferred (since it is all pure blood) specimens. What do you think?

Hey all, another strange literary research thread, this one brainstorming for several fantasy races/species. I want the biology to be as realistic as possible, more fun to write. Any help would be greatly appreciated! Elves: Just another (mostly) arboreal primate related to humans, not some magical godlike fairy folk. At least not much more magical. Main questions: What advantage do pointed ears give animals? Would retaining a more cartilaginous skeleton as an adult be beneficial in any way? Does the typical slender elf build seem suitable for an arboreal species? Firekin: Another related species, pyrokinetic and quite small, a 5'5" man being intimidating to some.…

What is the evolutionary advantage of tooth pain for humans or any primates for that matter? No one from the Primate order besides humans has ever had the ability to treat tooth pain, and we only got better at stopping tooth pain than inflicting it (in attempts to alleviate it) in the last 200 years or so. I get the overall purpose of pain. If something is injured you nurse it, go easy wait for it to heal. Teeth don't do that. All the pain does is decrease your ability to function, drain energy that could be used for survival tasks, and make eating harder.