Robittybob1

On 2/1/2020 at 8:52 PM, Duda Jarek said:

Sounds interesting - some interfering RNA?

 

The situation does not look optimistic here, exponential population growth continues ( https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6 ) and standard vaccine development needs a year.

In this moment the virus is still nearly identical: "The researchers also found that the eight complete 2019-nCoV genomes were more than 99.98 percent identical, "
https://www.genomeweb.com/genetic-research/coronavirus-genome-sequencing-finds-distinct-genetic-differences-2003-sars-virus

what is a big advantage for training immune response, but quickly mutations can start - especially with population growth.

What other defense options are there?

Wouldn't e.g. just putting its external proteins on a liposome work as provisional vaccine?

 

Where or when did the first case occur?

:-) ,probable this thread (only thread implied) would be one of the most lovely I have ever seen :-) haha look what an expression!.

 

"official jokes" :-)

 

 

I don't remember jus now. but the thing I can say is being lived in the past too many times

yes ,I will write there when I live again , but be sure ,because I have very entertaining personality I promise I will live.

 

haha my last expression also was comic

Didn't you mean "cosmic"?

^ NOT a UFO at all. It's clearly a flying elephant...

When was the last time there was a flying elephant landing near you?

He has to use a slide rule instead.

No wonder the mathematician got constipated. He underestimated the length of time it would take to precisely locate his slide ruler.

What does a mathematician with a constipation problem do?

 

 

 

 

 

- Works it out with a pencil!

What is the net result if he gets the calculation wrong?

That we went through a period of adaption to a semi-aquatic environment.

 

It is the question of whether our adaptions are specific to that environment which is the issue.

 

If you make the case the descended larynx's suggest adaptation to a semi-aquatic environment and I bring out a male Red or Fallow deer, he makes for an effective counterpoint.

 

I do have to admit some unavoidable bias. We have a score of accidental drownings every year in Florida. The media coverage at least is frequently concerned with cases involving young children. Can't really get away from the public safety campaign against it.

Even the aquatic mammals e.g seals didn't become fully aquatic (get their oxygen from the water like fish do) either, they still need to come up for air now and then. So even they drown I believe.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/01/120106-harp-seals-global-warming-sea-ice-science-environment/ - see there is at least one article confirming that.

When I looked at I didn't see that it was the best explanation for these traits.

Exactly it came to a matter of opinion and there was no way to make the decision final. But it gained my support for a semi-aquatic stage during human evolution.

I certainly support the AAT but in the end, because evolution is so slow, it becomes impossible to say why our genes were an advantage or non life threatening over the millions of years the changes have been occurring.

There was really good discussion of the topic on another sister forum last year. It probably would come up on a Google search "aquatic Ape again" forums.