jimmydasaint

From what has been written, there is no easy or predictable reason. There is peer pressure, social awkwardness, mob mentality, power play amonst other sociologically complex factors. However, is bullying in school a phenomenon that is restricted for the most part to the UK and America? If so, why can other Europeans develop a cooperative attitude whilst Britain and America turn to violence? Why?

I assume that if a colon is sterilised then careful dietary control would allow recolonisation. However, I have learnt a few new facts here. Very interesting stuff. Have you read anything about the types of antibiotics used generally in toothpastes etc...Are we breeding new strins of antibiotic resistant bacteria or is it a dosage/inhibitor dependent effect?

Of course, heat resistant strains. I know it is unlikely but I wondered, if left long enough, heat resistant strains would survive the temperature variations?

Being a regular drinker of strong mugs of tea, I just wondered if it is posible that by heating and re-heating water, we may encourage the selection of mutations that become thermophilic? Pretty ridiculous, but I wondered if anyone has tested this out?

I did not say all the gut bacteria. You are right, of course, the appendix is a storage facility for bacteria. this then raises another question. What about people with their appenidix removed due to appendicitis? Is there a higher incidence of certain diseases as a result?

I think humans would live for more than 2 hours without gut bacteria. It seems that gut bacteria can be destroyed by bacteriocidal (bacteria-killing, as opposed to bacteriostatic antibiotics which stop bacteria from reproducing) antibiotics use could allow internal body fungi (eg yeast) to proliferate in numbers at the advantage of dying bacteria. However, the bacteria 'bounce back' in large numbers from eating yoghurt and foods. It seems that daily intake of yoghurt may be beneficial.

However, I cannot find information which states if ALL gut bacteria are destroyed by antibiotics or not.

On a side note, it seems that cattle are fed antibiotcs regularly and we now have loads of antibacterial products in toothpastes, washing up powders etc...This may be worth a separate Thread but is society creating a possible ecological disaster by over-use of antibiotics which may lead to antibiotic resistance being widespread in bacteria?

I don't think Aaron Filler is a creationist or has an agenda. He is just trying to make a point that bipedal behaviour was around 21 million years ago and uses his extensive knolwedge of anatomy to prove his point. I find it astounding that he is not taken seriously and is seen as a 'troublemaker' because he does not concur with the consensus.

This is an intriguing thought from a 'proper' scientist, not a nutcase, who thought that the age of bipedal motility could be pushed back to around 21 million years ago rather than the conventional 6 million years consensus. I don't treat this as speculation but rigorous logic, yet I cannot find another slot for it:

Human Origins Revolutionized

An Upright Ancestor for the Apes

 

The discovery of an ancient fossil in Moroto, Uganda from 21 million years ago was the first sign of a major flaw in our models of human evolution. It is almost identical to a modern human lumbar vertebra.

 

But it was just one fossil against a world full of scientific opinion that humans, with their upright bipedal walking did not emerge until the chimpanzee-human split 6 million years ago.

 

Then fossils of another upright bipedal ape - Oreopithecus - were found. Then another - Pierolapithecus. And then Sahelanthropus.

 

First there was one. Now there are four upright bipedal species of apes before the chimp-human split.

 

Paleoanthropology as a field has not yet come to grips with the revolutionary implications. The first "human" was probably Morotopithecus and probably lived 21 million years ago. The existing apes have a human ancestor

http://www.uprightape.net/

Any thoughts, disagreements, agreements?

When you think of something about yourself - it may come true, or your thinking changes about it. For example, how do we explain the amazing placebo effect commonly used by psychiatrists? I have read that when asthmatics were given water in inhalers without their knowledge, it still opened up the airways in exactly the same way as when proper medicinal anti-inflammatory chemicals were used. You are being too universal. Apply the same 'philosophy' to yourself only. I believe it is called the Law of Attraction or something like that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Attraction

The Modern Synthesis can be thought of as a pulling together of various strands of Biology (hence the 'synthesis' bit) around the Darwinian evolutionary concept of overpopulation --> selection of favourable characteristic--->reproduction (Natural Selection). Population genetics had confirmed that Mendelian genetics showing how genes combined to produce a phenotype was thoroughly consistent with Darwinian theories. Saltationism (from Latin saltus- to leap) which suggested quick drastic genetic changes from one generation to the next, leading to speication was rejected. Paleontology suggested that rate of change in the features or phenotype were not at a constant rate but consistent with the fossil record. Everything was rosy and a central dogma had been suggested for biological evolution.

However, remember the date -1942. All I want to do is open up a discussion for why Extended Evolutionary Synthesis is required and to ask if it really adds anything substantial to the Modern Synthesis?

http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/ee/pigliuccilab/Papers_files/2007-Evolution-EES.pdf

Got it now. The Dalluge et al paper explains it very clearly and should ameliorate the apparent 'controversy':

With regard to modification patterns, however, we find that

tRNA from psychrophilic and psychrotrophic bacteria is in

general significantly hypomodified compared to that of organisms

which grow optimally at higher temperatures. The psychrophiles

and psychrotroph studied here contain, on average, 10

to 15 modified nucleosides (Fig. 1), compared with approximately

29 for mesophilic bacteria such as Salmonella typhimurium

(5) and E. coli (18) or as many as 31 for the archaeal

hyperthermophile Pyrobaculum islandicum, which grows optimally

at 1008C (15, 34). All of the posttranscriptionally modified

nucleosides identified in the presently studied bacteria are

known to be involved in the maintenance of basic structural

characteristics of tRNA molecules.

http://jb.asm.org/cgi/reprint/179/6/1918?ck=nck

Are you not on holiday yet? Anyway, try here and if it does not help, give us a message.

http://www.revision-notes.co.uk/revision/271.html

I quote:

B-cells are produced in the bone marrow and are distributed through the body in the lymph nodes. B-cells respond to the ‘foreign’ antigens of a pathogen by producing specific antibodies. Antibodies are complex proteins that are released into the blood and carried to the site of infection. B-cells do not fight pathogens directly.

 

 

 

An antibody, or immunoglobulin, is a y-shaped protein molecule that is made by a B-lymphocyte in response to a particular antigen. Antibodies interact with the antigen and render it harmless. When a pathogen tries to invade the body for the first time, each of its antigens activates B-cell, which divides rapidly to produce a large population of cells. All the new cells are identical: we say they are clones, and they all secrete antibodies specific for the invading pathogen. When the infection is over, most of the newlymade B-cells die. This sequence of events is the primary immune response.

 

 

 

So that the body can respond more quickly next time, some of the activated B-cells persist in the body for several years. These memory cells ‘remember’ what the pathogen is like and, if it tries to invade again, they all divide rapidly to produce an even greater number of active B-cells, all capable of secreting specific antibody. This response is called a secondary immune response and is very much quicker and more effective than the primary response.

 

Dude, you have to watch these brilliant animations:

http://www.learner.org/channel/courses/biology/archive/animations/hires/a_hiv1_h.html

I also fail to see any controversies, and was therefore not able to address the question. The follow-up post makes it clearer what is meant, but as already mentioned, the tRNA is post-transcriptionally modified in several areas, especially the uridine. Again, that is basic textbook, no controversies here. These modifications influence the structural integrity of the tRNA. For instance, the composition of modified bases is markedly different in thermophilic as compared to psychrophilic organisms in order to ensure a functional tRNA despite extreme high/low temperatures.

 

It could be that the misunderstanding was just the result of maybe slightly awkward wording in the OP. In any case, a number of enzymes

Charon Y could you please give me some references to papers etc.. online. I want to read up further on this because it seems odd that one or two bases affect the integrity of a crosslinked 3-D structure.

Well the magnetic field actually protects us from high energy charged particles emitted by the sun. When these charged particles encounter a magnetic field they are deflected. If these weren't deflected, they would rain down on us and damage our cells and DNA.

 

As the change of the poles would not happen instantly (maybe over decades or centuries), then we would be exposed to these highly damaging particles for that length of time. Rates of cancers would sky-rocket, and this would be bad for humanity (not to mention virtually all other forms of life too).

This is a BIG deal and a frightening thought. Bearing in mind that the ozone layer is relatively depleted, do you think that the effect of these charged particles will be increased? Just cross-contextualising but is it possible that such an event occurred when dinosaurs became extinct and the dino's died of massive cancers?

It seems that the Earth may experience a reversal in the Geomagnetic Poles so that the Magnetic North and Magnetic South get reversed. Now, I can see this being a problem for migrating birds and marine animals that may use fields to navigate. However, it is not likely to affect humans to a significant extent, for example to cause large numbers of casualties...

or is it? Any thoughts?

Although the inspection of past reversals does not indicate biological extinctions, present society with its reliance on electricity and electromagnetic effects (e.g. radio, satellite communications) may be vulnerable to technological disruptions in the event of a full field reversal.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagnetic_reversal

from:

http://www.mnh.si.edu/earth/text/4_1_5_0.html

Excellent points John B. I think there is controversy about the strongly held views of one important person here - Professor Hapgood- who was convinced that these maps were genuine. you are right in mentioning that the map was a compilation of previous maps. However, the critical point is in showing if the Piri Reis map agrees with the Antactic land mass under the ice. If it does, and it can be confirmed, that would indicate that a civilisation existed which mapped the area at least 6000 years ago and then passed on the information to later generations of sailors.

The Piri Re'is map is often exhibited in cases seeking to prove that civilization was once advanced and that, through some unknown event or events, we are only now gaining any understanding of this mysterious cultural decline. The earliest known civilization, the Sumerians in Mesopotamia, appear out of nowhere around 4,000 B.C. but have no nautical or maritime cultural heritage. They do, however, speak reverently of ancestral people who were like the "gods" and were known as the nefilim.

 

Here is a summary of some of the most unusual findings about the map:

 

 

Scrutiny of the map shows that the makers knew the accurate circumference of the Earth to within 50 miles.

 

 

The coastline and island that are shown in Antarctica must have been navigated at some period prior to 4,000 B.C. when these areas were free of ice from the last Ice Age.

 

The map is thought to be one of the earliest "world maps" to show the Americas. Early scholars suggested that it showed accurate latitudes of the South American and African coastlines - only 21 years after the voyages of Columbus! (And remember, Columbus did NOT discover North America - only the Caribbean!) Writing in Piri Re'is own hand described how he had made the map from a collection of ancient maps, supplemented by charts that were drawn by Columbus himself. This suggests that these ancient maps were available to Columbus and could have been the basis of his expedition.

http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_1.htm

I wonder if the ancient Harappans had also managed to map the ancient world about 9000 years ago. So Hmmm again...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1768109.stm

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/Piri_reis_world_map_01.jpg

 

high res images of the map.

 

everything below southamerica ceases to look like a map and looks like no place on earth. lots of repetitive patterns.

 

also, antartica without its icesheet is more a series od smaller islands than a solid coastline as depicted in that map.

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e0/AntarcticaRockSurface.jpg

Hmmm - thanks for the links to Wiki and I agree with you, the map seems dubious doesn't it and with duplications of rivers etc... would not be accurate to today's standards. Therefore it is a reasonably accurate map for its time but not the most accurate and probably not as mysterious as it seems.

The scientific method uses logic, deductive logic or the hypothetico-deductive method involving hypothesis, experiment, falsification, and then the formulation of a new hypothesis.

However, IMHO, there are cases where logic cannot work and a sensible hypothesis cannot be made, leaving only speculation.

For example, the map made by a Turkish Fleet Admira, lPiri Reis, seems to include a perfect map of the Northern coast of Antarctica showing the coastline UNDER ICE.

A quote from the article indicates the problem:

The official science has been saying all along that the ice-cap which covers the Antarctic is million years old.

The Piri Reis map shows that the northern part of that continent has been mapped before the ice did cover it. That should make think it has been mapped million years ago, but that's impossible since mankind did not exist at that time.

[urlhttp://http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_1.htm[/url]

There are a number of other mysteries on this site. Are there cases where pure logic does not prevail or is it just the old chestnut of 'we don't have enough information at this point...' I prefer to believe that mankind is older than our estimates or that intelligent life has arisen before our estimates...What about you?

It may be because I taught in a single sex school recently. However, I think the setting of students helps immensely. For example, the most able are given are placed in classes where they would never have contact with less intellectually able students.

As a teacher I am somewhat puzzled by the choice of a person to become either an 'outcast' in a class or a person that becomes the target of bullies. I have tried to find something that is different about the bullied but cannot see it. For example, I taught a girl that was bullied by the rest of the class. The class would make comments about her, for example: 'she smells'. However, she was clean. The members of the class that indulged in the bullying were a cross-section from 'good' to 'naughty' students.

In another case, a boy was tortured daily by others in the class verbally. I could not see any difference between him and the others. It was not racist because other members of the same race were participating in the abuse.

A speculation could be the type of response to an insult by a pupil. If the response is not measured and extreme from a bullied child, it becomes a source of constant amusement to 'press the correct buttons'. The more extreme the reaction, the more sustained the bullying.

Curiously, though, the very bright are exempt from the bullying regardless of individual eccentricities because the 'lads' and 'ladettes' actually wish they were as bright and respect brains.

Any other speculations though on the choice of the bullied by the bully?

[i should mention that I am appalled by bullying and do everything I can to help the bullied]

Actually the main reason is not to recognize RNA.

Or rather it is the other way round. Thymine is formed by methylation of uracil. So in other words, it is additionally modified in the DNA (for stability and fidelity).

Thanks for the correction. I should have sussed this out. However, the controversy of the OP is about the presence of T in tRNA hence he/she regards this as controversial. So far, he/she has not recived an answer.

I don't know about ESS but I assume it is too simplistic to assume that mutation, selection and reproduction in Natural Selection provides a complete description of an organism's interaction with its environment and the inheritance of subsequent traits. (I would also add in facilitated differentiation as a sub-note to phenotypic plasticity). I quote:

For sometime now there has been talk of a new Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES), and this article begins to outline why we may need such an extension, and how it may come about. As philosopher Karl Popper has noticed, the current evolutionary theory is a theory of genes, and we still lack a theory of forms. The field began, in fact, as a theory of forms in Darwin's days, and the major goal that an EES will aim for is a unification of our theories of genes and of forms. This may be achieved through an organic grafting of novel concepts onto the foundational structure of the MS, particularly evolvability, phenotypic plasticity, epigenetic inheritance, complexity theory, and the theory of evolution in highly dimensional adaptive landscapes.

http://lib.bioinfo.pl/pmid:17924956

Thymine is in DNA. DNA has four bases: Adenine (A), Thymine (T), Guanine (G) and Cytosine ©. DNA has two strands with these four bases bonded to each other and able to make long sequences millions of bases long in and arranged in a number of chromosomes. Sites on the DNA which are more 'open' for the start of making messenger RNA (called transcription) tend to have runs of Adenine and Thymine because there are only two hydrogen bonds between A and T. G and C on opposite strands have three hydrogen bonds. RNA is found in three forms - tRNA, rRNA and mRNA. The Adenines are bonded to Uracil (U) a different base from thymine. IMHO the uracil can be recognised by enzymes that bind to RNA. Is that what you meant?

YT - great stuff. Why did the green trees not look green when the green filter was held in front of them? Just a simple question which probably has a simple answer.

I hate to be a spoiler of this good atmosphere but I don't know if we can extrapolate from yeast to man in that way even if genes are conserved there are whole modules of gene control which are not taken into account for a motile organism which is independent of its environment- I would still stick to decaffinated mocha latte