Stefan-CoA

Keep in mind the diagnostics are continuously increasing as are the number of people with access to a suited physician/psychologist. So what we may be observing is rather an increase in the recognition of the autism spectrum disorders rather than an actual increase in the prevalence of these disorders. Whereas 10 years ago the kid may have "been a little strange" these days its got Autism, ADHD or whatnot.

Not even getting a hangover. 1 glass of water per 1-2 drinks.

Semantics. That's more or less what I meant.

Sorry, I did not know that.

Ask Dr. House?

No but seriously it sounds like you have a bacterial infection. I assume you've been on antibiotics already? The fact that they've had no effect could point to an infection in the smooth muscle or possibly within the lining of your stomach? It's the timing that throws me off though, every 2/3 years?

Or a bezoar? Maybe some of your food gets caught up in a bezoar and provides a safe haven for bacteria that, once they reach critical load (say every 2/3 years) they become active and start poisoning you and somehow die off again? Are they stomach cramps or intestine cramps? What environmental factors could there be? I wouldn't discount allergies just yet.

You'll have to excuse my explanation as I am certainly no biologist.

 

As a matter of illustration, I think it is a mistake to assume that the ability to camouflage is a trait that appears within an individual species over the course of its lifetime. It is inherent. The appearance of camouflage within a population is a result of positive selection - i.e. organisms who do not posses the trait have an intrinsically low ability to survive and thus do not pass on their genetic information to subsequent generations, whereas those that do posses it will.

I think it might be a mistake to assume it's an ability in the first place (except for chameleons and the like) but generally camouflage is part of the organism's build. As with the stick insect, or that butterfly with the owl eyes on its wings. The peppered moth is a beautiful example of how this works. You have white moths that are nearly invisible against white buildings, therefore the rate of predations is low. But in the population also exists an allele for a black moth that pops up now and then (It doesn't confer the ability to change colour at will, it's exactly the same moth, just one is white, the other black). Now, the black ones are obviously very visible against a white background thus making them easy prey. But as pollution and soot levels increase, the walls become darker and darker, shifting the balance of power. Now the black moths are less likely to be eaten. Thus allowing them to propagate. Note: Even if both parents are white moths, it is still possible, due to random mutation, to have black offspring, the incidence is just much lower.

So it has to do with survival pressure (natural selection) and random mutations. If there is a mutation that allows an organism to survive given a set of circumstances, this organism will be in a position to pass that trait/mutation along to its progeny and so forth.

I guess the main reason why people don't discuss it is because a) We aren't superstitious "people" and b) it's boring. Really, who hasn't been through this debate over and over again? Nothing will happen. It is bunk. Please devote your time to something more fruitful, like proving the existence of god

Such an effort would be pointless. Because even if you identify markers that all people of one country have in common, other people from other countries will also have them (especially if, with each birth you expand the national pool). So are you going to forcibly nationalise people from other countries?

Also, I think the logistical effort of testing several million people would make this a no-go.

Plus, I don't think that you'll get racism on a genetic level. It sounds too silly.

Oh? You have 1152627 A/T?

No sorry, this is a 762793 G/C only beach.

Even if you don't shoot people, I don't think you are allowed to run around firing off weapons randomly because that would force people to take cover or otherwise make sure they don't get hit by a bullet.

 

Likewise if you are randomly shouting curse words, even if there is no hate or direction, people who don't want to hear them would need to take extra care distancing or shielding themselves to avoid them.

 

Do we want everyone visiting scienceforums.net to feel comfortable here or only those who don't mind bad language?

I'd have to disagree with that, if I say fuck, I'm not doing it to offend anybody. If you get offended by the simple utterance of 'fuck', why not with 'cat' or 'bus'? People who get offended by the simple use of language, by how the specific arrangement of vowels and consonants sound, to signify something specific are just childish. Unless I go around, pointing a finger at you and saying "fuck you" there is no reason, whatsoever to feel insulted. If you can censor one simple word, you can pretty much do whatever the hell you like. Yes, I just used the slippery slope argument.

Unless it's hate speech, censorship is a pointless endeavour.

Moontaman, in India cows are holy. So it's prolly blasphemy or something.

I don't really mind, far as I'm concerned anybody can use whatever language they feel they need to in order to express themselves. People who use "curse" words are no less intelligent or cultured than those who don't.

Hate speech is a big no-no though. In the USA you're allowed to bear arms, just not shoot people you don't like with them. Similar concept with free speech methinks.

I just enjoy how every American in the world is currently frothing at the mouth with the stars 'n stripes in his left hand and beating his chest with the right, whereas people from other countries are "Wait a minute".

Americans aren't much different from the terrorists. Except they have an army of democracy, peace, justice and happiness to do the killing rather than religious fanatics.

And I'm sorry, this whole shrine to terrorism business. Are you people for real? If such a thing were to happen, the US of A would just drop a bomb to make it all go away. It hasn't happened with Lenin and his body is open to the public viewing.

I don't think any terrorist is so stupid to go and make a public place his recruitment center. If anything they could have just used it as bait.

I'd love to be immortal. You could just carry on learning everything there is to learn. Experience everything there is to experience. On earth. And by the time you're done with that, you could then go visit other planet (because we'll totally have discovered Warp drive by then)

I think immortality would prove to be one of the most fascinating experiences ever.

I don't think much will change. I can't remember having seen a video where Osama claimed responsibility for anything in a long time. It'll be business as usual for terrorists all over the world

Give it a few million years and appropriate selective pressures and I'm sure this would be possible.

Thing is, even if chickens have no use for their wings it's most likely only because humans prevent them from flying. I'm not sure but I think chickens can still fly to a degree. And if there is a wing/arm cross-over chicken, not much will come of it because who would want to eat their flesh/eggs and it will probably be culled. If chickens were to live free though...

Furthermore, I doubt there is any observable change just yet, we've only been cultivating chickens for a few thousand years at most, far too short a time for any such changes to make themselves observable.

it took a long time but i am not sure in how many days or years.

Approximately 13 to 14 billion years for the evolution of the universe, about 4.5 billion for our own solar system. A further 1.3 for the appearance of life and then about 3.2 for the evolution of man.

There's a sammich joke in here I know it. 'course pissing off the admins isn't too clever.

I think part of the reason is that women don't have that "go-get-it" mentality that men have. They are happier with "settling" than with fighting their way to the top. I mean, you do get those that do make it to the top as well, but they tend to be very scary.Where I currently work, the guys are outnumbered by girls about 5 to 1. BUT 90% of the girls that do work there are (despite being university students) completely content working there. (Casual work at a bookstore) whereas all of the guys want to do something better with themselves.

I don't know what it's like in shiny America or Europe but in South Africa we've got tons and tons of laws that actually penalise companies if they've hired too many white males (not because we're good at our jobs, but apparently just because we're white). Instead these "fines" are levied if the company hires women or people of colour preferentially. I'm 22 and chances that I'll get a job based on my qualifications and skills (one I'm done studying) are practically zilch.

This isn't based on any actual study or whatnot. This is just how I've observed things in my own environment.

Hope I didn't offend no one.

You don't understand.

It is the A dam.

So what you're saying is that man, built A dam, on the 7th Eve and (e)DEN left clues (which he "created") all round the earth for us to seek out? So that we could "bring the light" from the heavens down to earth?

It all makes sense now.

What Lyndale painstakingly did with pictures, I just cobbled together in a few seconds with words. I apologise for my poor wit.

I'd counsel against marrying him.

As far as I know, in utero testing (when the foetus is still in the womb) isn't commercially available yet. But you should be able to go to a company (or send your blood off) where they can perform tests as to which of you is carrying identified markers for mental issues. BUT, development of the brain, from a genetic perspective, is a very complex thing and chances are that the tests won't be all too conclusive. So like I said, if you can avoid it, please do so. Even if they don't end up with mental issues there are a host of other problems that can crop up; muscular dystrophies, developmental abnormalities, stunted growth, the list goes on. Rather get someone from outside of your family first to introduce some genetic variation again, then, further down the line if your son or daughter want to marry their cousins it won't be too severe. But for you, unfortunately I don't think it'd be the best decision.

Hope it helped

Are you using RNase AWAY? Could be just residual RNase floating about (I hear they're quite persistent). I know that in the lab where I worked as an undergraduate they used that stuff at every opportunity. Spraying gloves and work surfaces and equipment with it.

Hey, a rabbit attacking a pair of buttocks is quite amazing in its own right. As rabbits are neither carnivorous nor known to attack humans. This could be evidence for a prehistoric rabbit species that preyed on human flesh. Maybe a link as to why Neanderthals went extinct? Furthermore, what sort of cataclysmic event could have lead to the extinction of this clearly terrifying species? And why the buttocks specifically?

EDIT: The previous post by Lyndale was edited away to the current one. My response made more sense with that one there.

Oh and yeah, stretching. It's what you do when you see random patterns and seek to find non-random explanations for them. Like connecting unrelated dots on a map.

Wow, I haven't seen this kinda stretching since the World Gymnastic Championships.

I could also draw random lines and squiggles and make pictures out of them. In one of your pictures I saw a giant rabbit attacking a pair of buttocks.

What about the case in Germany where a guy posted his desire to eat a human being, asking for volunteers, in a local newspaper. He got a response and the "dinner" was apparently quite alright with having parts of him eaten as far as I know. Would one be able to excuse such behaviour? I mean it involves two consenting adults who are wholly able to comprehend what they are getting into.

I agree with lemur, I've heard say it's closer to pork. Maybe 'tis why it's banned by some religions?

I rate you do it anyways. There's nothing here that people smarter than us haven't already discussed to hell and gone with similar outcomes. First it's a friendly debate then someone comes along and pretends to be smarter and then the mud-slinging and ad hominem starts.

Iceveela: You are 19, no matter how smart you are you can't compete with several years of university-level training, your thinking whilst on the right track is still too egocentric. Stop trying so hard to prove your point and work with what other people offer you (less aggressively if I might add), that is the nature of a great discussion.

About evolution: for the last 160 years, people on both end of the spectrum have been feverishly trying to prove/disprove this little theory with quite some vigour. Well, it's survived this long. It is, currently, the best explanation for the available evidence (of which there is a boat-load). I'm not saying it is the absolute truth on the matter. But it is the best way of explaining those things that we can observe. Citing the fossil record as being incomplete is a fallacy, because at some point in time there will be two sets of skeletons, where one is the immediate ancestor of the other and no further intermediate will be found and secondly, we are trying to look at things lost in the earth for several thousand years. If you even look at the process of how fossils are formed it is incredibly amazing to think that we've even found as many as we have. Even if, in some far, magical future, evolution was disproved, that doesn't change the fact that, without it several areas in biology would not have progressed as far and as fast as they have. We know enough about biology, geology, physics, astronomy, archeology, history and paleontology to have fully discredited the linch-pin of creation "science"(?), namely that the earth was created in its present state 6000 to 10000 years ago. Even if you think evolution is wrong, you immediately have to discredit all those other sciences. And then you just become a crazy person . I guess the main thing that worries people is that evolution removes this notion of anthropocentrism, just like Galileo/Copernicus did (except on a larger scale). I haven't met a person who thinks evolution is wrong that doesn't simultaneously believe that they are really, really special and that God (or whatever) has put them, AND ONLY THEM, on the earth for an inscrutably special purpose the they AND ONLY THEY can perform. Yes, it is scary that we are here by mere fluke, but isn't it fascinating also? Isn't it beautiful that here is a process, as simple concept, that ties together all the natural world in one, giant web of life and inter-relation? As opposed some dude with a beard snapping his fingers and there you are.

@ SMF: I rate we don't give in to iceveela. I've seen the type before, they are the religious type who lord their basic understanding of science over the rest of us in attempt to discredit us or our assertions. When one proceeds to ask uncomfortable questions one is then met with the "YAWN" attitude. They make hypothetical assertions that are somehow mystically proven yet won't show the proof and when challenged on a hypothetical ground they suddenly demand proof and if one isn't immediately forthcoming with the proof you get the "LIAR LIAR WHERE IS YOUR SCIENCE NOW!" response.

After speaking with a friend I realised that this thread rests upon a false dichotomy. What if there were other processes at work? Processes as yet unknown? Also creation implies the origin of life, a question which evolution can not fully answer. One can only speculate about the origin of life.

Structural isomer. Same chemical formula, different structure