archive-org.com » ORG » B » BIOLOGY-ONLINE.ORG

Total: 791

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • Biology-Online • View topic - human dietry evolution since the agricultural revolution?
    is right Reply with quote Darby Darby Posts 1274 Joined Thu Mar 02 2006 5 29 pm Location New York USA Re human dietry evolution since the agricultural revolution Sun Jan 25 2015 10 36 pm Why would he think that humans are exempt from evolution An example of dietary evolution is persistance of lactase production in dairy use populations Reply with quote hamlet101 hamlet101 Posts 2 Joined Mon Jan 19 2015 1 42 pm Sun Jan 25 2015 10 49 pm he just thinks human evolution has been negligible since we were hunter gatherers and therefore the paleo diet no milk or cereals must be better suited to us I do see the simple appeal of that logic Reply with quote rhianna rhianna Posts 1 Joined Wed Apr 22 2015 7 31 am Wed Apr 22 2015 7 37 am Great information really appreciate this forum Reply with quote Darby Darby Posts 1274 Joined Thu Mar 02 2006 5 29 pm Location New York USA Sun May 17 2015 10 01 pm So as agriculture adjusted nutrients levels in food not always in a predictable or single nutrient way there would be selection for those best able to mobilize and use those nutrients As our diets have changed it s likely that our abilities to best use those diets has changed as well Reply with quote Luxorien Luxorien Posts 55 Joined Fri Jan 20 2012 1 27 am Sun Jan 17 2016 9 13 pm Google skeptic paleo diet and you ll find lots of cool stuff that explains this nonsense http www scientificamerican com artic eally eat http www skepticalraptor com skeptica ithi diet http rationalwiki org wiki Paleo diet Reply with quote fanbrits fanbrits Posts 4 Joined Mon Jan 18 2016 1 23 pm Re human dietry

    Original URL path: http://www.biology-online.org/biology-forum/about41411.html (2016-02-17)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Biology-Online • View topic - Mendelian creations and natural selection - animals
    Website Mendelian creations and natural selection animals Thu Jun 11 2015 3 53 am POTENT OVOTESTICLES of animals extract PURE genome Then the conditions test the organisms Reply with quote Luxorien Luxorien Posts 55 Joined Fri Jan 20 2012 1 27 am Sun Jan 17 2016 9 04 pm WHAT What are you even WHAT Post a reply Jump to Select a forum General Biology General Discussion Cell Biology Molecular

    Original URL path: http://www.biology-online.org/biology-forum/about41985.html (2016-02-17)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Biology-Online • View topic - Taxonomy question close to the Last Universal Ancestor
    old but there are other characteristics besides the presence of a nucleus which are used to make this determination Eukaryotes and Archeae share genes that are not found in true bacteria for instance Multiple lines of evidence point to an earlier branching between eukaryotes and archebacteria than between either of them and true bacteria I agree that it seems counterintuitive Whales are a good example of this same phenomenon Evidence points to a land dwelling ancestor for whales So even though they live in the ocean and have fins like fish they are more closely related to land mammals than any of the phyla of fish Seems weird on the surface but makes sense once you dive into HAHAHA GET IT the evidence Reply with quote typology typology Posts 3 Joined Fri Jan 15 2016 8 28 am Fri Jan 15 2016 9 00 am The Last Universal Ancestor LUCA was not one type of organism but 3 early eukaryotes and the first archaea This has been derived from the application of the Paradigm of Types in Cosmology and Biology These organisms were derived from two types of 4 types of chemical combination Eukaryotes and prokaryotes emerged independently with eukaryotes preceding prokaryotes and archaea preceding bacteria The precipitation of the chemical combinations into biological life involved 232 types of particles which constitute the emission called radiation The paradigm also indicates that although the completely sequence genome of life of Earth has 191 types across the three domains there are 211 types across the three domains in the Universe The additional 20 exist on one other planet The paradigm is presented as the second section of an essay called Waves and The Cave and the true nature of the Universe which is located at home spin net au paradigm true pdf

    Original URL path: http://www.biology-online.org/biology-forum/about43134.html (2016-02-17)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Biology-Online • View topic - A new evolution theory
    discussion is here https groups google com forum topic mDDTSdnoXQ and here http www scienceforums net topic 8945 ion theory Reply with quote typology typology Posts 3 Joined Fri Jan 15 2016 8 28 am Fri Jan 15 2016 9 36 am The process of biological evolution begins with its creation from two types of 4 types of chemical combinations that have been subject to radiation in the form of 232 types of particles The Last Universal Common Ancestor was not one type but 3 early eukaryotes and the first archaea Eukaryotes and prokaryotes emerged independently from different types of 4 types of chemical combinations The three early eukaryotes preceded the first archaea and it preceded bacteria This information is derived from the Paradigm of Types in Cosmology and Biology which represents through an arrangement of the numbers of types everything that exists within the Universe across cosmology and biology The paradigm also indicates that although the completely sequence genome of life of Earth has 191 types across the three domains there are 211 types across the three domains in the Universe The additional 20 exist on one other type of planet The paradigm is introduced as the second section

    Original URL path: http://www.biology-online.org/biology-forum/about41970.html (2016-02-17)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Biology-Online • View topic - Question on Neutral Mutations
    if fixation in this case matters to my question would it be considered a neutral mutation even though it does have a visible affect on the organism the affect would be still being able to eat skittles when normally it s not supposed to Because in one part of the definition it says mutations that spread not because of natural selection are called neutral mutations But in another part it says neutral mutations are neither beneficial or detrimental to the organism Herein lies my confusion Hope someone can help After writing this out I had a thought with one part of my confusion that may answer my question but still hoping someone can confirm the idea of the mutation being beneficial or detrimental is the key Even if the organism can eat skittles when it shouldn t if this ability doesn t help or harm the organisms survival and ability to reproduce in other words its fitness then it s considered a neutral mutation And defining whats beneficial or not would be seeing how this mutation affects it s fitness So my follow up question would be anyone who read this far I appreciate your curiosity and time for even sparing a thought to this long winded confusing post What if a mutation IS considered beneficial it positively affects the organisms fitness but it spread through genetic drift would it still be considered a neutral mutation Or is it by definition if a mutation is beneficial positive affect on fitness and spreads through the population it is always by definition because of natural selection and therefore not a neutral mutation And that there aren t any instances where it was seen otherwise Thank you to anyone in advance who takes the time to read all this And a big THANK YOU to anyone who can answer my question s Reply with quote Luxorien Luxorien Posts 55 Joined Fri Jan 20 2012 1 27 am Wed Dec 30 2015 6 38 pm This is probably too late to help you with your paper but the terms beneficial detrimental and neutral refer to the effect the mutation has on the organism s success in reproducing Since you generally have to be alive to reproduce most traits that are positively selected have some impact on survival If a specific allele has an effect on survival it will tend to increase decrease because of natural selection However this does not mean that genetic drift plays no role in the frequency of such alleles A beneficial allele could disappear from a population if the one individual who carried that allele died before reproducing for reasons unrelated to the presence of that allele A detrimental allele could become fixed in a population if for instance some catastrophic event just happened to kill off every individual without the detrimental allele It sounds to me like you are connecting genetic drift and neutral mutations too closely All alleles are subject to genetic drift so the fact that a

    Original URL path: http://www.biology-online.org/biology-forum/about43250.html (2016-02-17)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Biology-Online • View topic - Where do new species come from?
    a result of geographic isolation and both populations will adapt differently to their environment It confuses how new species can appear when organisms best suited for the environment are simply selected for survival so they were there before Maybe I have the wrong concept in my head I have been trying to understand what actually happens and any help will be greatly appreciated Reply with quote Darby Darby Posts 1274 Joined Thu Mar 02 2006 5 29 pm Location New York USA Thu Oct 01 2015 5 56 pm As variations are selected what changes over time is the predominant combinations of traits with a large enough shift in conditions and or a decent amount of drift your eventual typical individual in the population which is after all what we call a species can be significantly different from the ancestral average Reply with quote disneyfreak828 disneyfreak828 Posts 1 Joined Thu Nov 19 2015 1 59 am Thu Nov 19 2015 2 06 am Evolution is the theory that species adapt due to the needs of their surroundings for example if a large threat in the ocean suddenly happened giant shark environmental issue the sea life needs to adapt to those

    Original URL path: http://www.biology-online.org/biology-forum/about42909.html (2016-02-17)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Biology-Online • View topic - Am I the Next Step in Human Evolution?
    much of a difference I am not sure really Not as far as evolution is concerned that is My metabolism is fine but I put on weight There s reasons for it I won t discuss at the moment but does having a higher metabolism matter that much without a reason for it Not in our society And I could go on with all the traits that I have all of them coming down to Are they required for survival or not Do my traits mater in the long run As a species some anthropologists debate on whether we are evolving or not Obviously we are it s always happening But what I mean is how much of change There isn t really a need right now for any trait over the other We re pretty stagnant as a species If we were out in the wild evolution would be more obvious But currently with all that we have there s not that many large changes Nothing that would majorly matter At least in my opinion I guess it could all be down to Why do you think any of those traits would be beneficial to a species Reply with quote IamAnAlien IamAnAlien Posts 3 Joined Sun Nov 20 2011 8 49 pm Re Am I the Next Step in Human Evolution Tue Nov 22 2011 6 37 am JackBean wrote If you re so intelligent are you already finished with University at your age Did you do already some real research or just chating online I ve only recently discovered that I fit the profile of a gifted person I ve spent most of my life isolating myself from others because I felt different and have always assumed I was bad or wrong or something It turns out that almost every social problem I ve ever had was due to the fact that my mental age was far ahead of my peers if you google problems gifted children face you ll find basically the definition of my entire childhood I ve never been able to fully utilize my potential because of many of these problems but that doesn t mean that I don t have genetically impressive mental capabilities I haven t finished university I actually dropped out because I found my classes too easy I already know a lot of the information they teach in many subjects up to the 3rd year level and find it nearly impossible to sit through the really slow paced lectures I m currently in the process of setting myself up as an entrepreneur and am planning on finishing my education on line so that I can move at the faster speed that I naturally work at JackBean wrote If you re so intelligent you could use metric system as rest of the world Anyway I m about 1 95 m so probably even taller than you and I m not even extra tall in comparison to other people Intelligence and the system of measurement I use have absolutely no correlation I am Canadian and we do use the metric system however for some reason when we talk about our height we still use the imperial system I am 1 93 metres tall so yes you are slightly taller than me well done You say you aren t tall compared to others 95 of the world s population is shorter than 190cm which means that you and I are in the tallest 5 JackBean wrote yep I ve spend 3 months in Japan during the bird flu break and didn t get sick either I m usually dressed little less than others does that make me superior Not really just little weatherproof Japan is a first world country with vastly superior medical technology and expertise compared with Malaysia Plus the bird flu really wasn t the only concern while I was there disease was everywhere and hygiene was terrible But I only mentioned that trip because that is the only time I ve been sick since I was a young child and I wanted to explain the situation a little I wasn t trying to impress anyone by saying I survived a trip to South East Asia JackBean wrote Since my childhood I ve been said I must have tapeworm since I eat so much and am so slight Am I superior Cool Although I think that s rather disadvantage How is that a disadvantage Having efficient nutrient intake is a very advantageous ability There are some people that gain weight and are unable to stay healthy despite eating healthy and exercising I don t really do either and yet I ve got very low cholesterol have a healthy body mass index low blood pressure etc That doesn t seem like an advantage Reply with quote IamAnAlien IamAnAlien Posts 3 Joined Sun Nov 20 2011 8 49 pm Re Am I the Next Step in Human Evolution Tue Nov 22 2011 8 28 am ChesneMD wrote And do not take offense Not at all The only reason I came here was to have a discussion the more you disagree the greater the learning opportunity I m glad you took the time to write so much ChesneMD wrote Aging slowly Can be good or bad but there is no evidence to suggest it is good or that you are aging slowly It also has to occur on a large scale it will be unnoticeable otherwise So it is irrelevant Aging slowly isn t necessarily good for animal species since overpopulation can lead to food shortages and eventually extinction of a species This may eventually be the fate of humankind as well but I m optimistic and can see our species overcoming these limitations Regardless when I say evolutionary step forward I m talking about desirable genetic advancements Things that we would wish on ourselves I suppose that this doesn t exactly fit with the Darwinian definition of evolution but we are a very different species than the other animals of this planet How we evolve now at least the way I see it is really not for survival any more but for our own betterment as individuals If I look like a 30 year old when I m 40 I will have much better chances of finding mates and passing on my genes As for the lack of evidence that I myself am aging slowly you re right I don t really have any I ve recently watched a TED talk by Cynthia Kenyon who has discovered a simple genetic mutation existing in many species that has the potential to almost double lifespan not just by delaying death but actually slowing the aging process altogether She found that certain human populations have this mutation and are generally the ones living to be older than 100 I don t know for sure if this is relevant to the evolution of humankind but I d like to think it is ChesneMD wrote Intelligence You lack other abilities which seem to be what our species requires Intelligence is great for science and therefore us if you accomplish anything but it is irrelevant to us as a species otherwise If you have both that s great for society if you do anything with it When you say I lack other abilities what are you referring to Was it the fact that I said that I have difficulty with conversation and writing I guess I should have explained a little bit I write better than most people I know but I dislike it because there is no certainty whereas in mathematics and computer programming there is a clearly defined right and wrong I also generally think of multiple things to write but can only get one thought down before another few ideas crop up So even though I can write well I don t write to the standard I wish I could And as for conversation I have amazing discussions with the few people I know who are intelligent enough to keep up with me but most people just make small talk and really aren t that interesting it s them who I have trouble talking to Again you mention that it s irrelevant for us as a species but is it really We have put ourselves on a path that seems very likely to end in the extinction of most species on earth including us The only foreseeable way off of this path is for us to figure out how to overcome it We need to learn and discover and think to survive We may one day expand to other planets in order to combat problems like overpopulation and dwindling resources Even before we can accomplish this we will likely need to find solutions to other issues that will plague us further in the future These are things that we need great intellect for and I believe that we need to become smarter as a species to make these dreams a reality ChesneMD wrote Height Good and bad as well Being taller seems to come with more cardiac problems the heart works harder though it more noticeable in those with gigantism Being taller is irrelevant Someone shorter than you can be more adaptive and therefore you are maldaptive and inferior Having more of something doesn t mean you are better You re totally right the height thing really doesn t have many evident advantages I guess I just mentioned it because it s one more thing that sets me apart and I m really just curious if it has any ties to the other traits I ve mentioned I wasn t trying to say that I m better I was just looking for input as to whether or not this was significant ChesneMD wrote Immune system Can be good or bad having a superior one Some theories suggests for instance have a tapewarm is an adaptive quality because it lowers our immune system It is believed that our immune systems are too powerful currently There are other theories with other parasites bacteria etc along with it The immunology subject is really too large to be summarized to something this short For instance taking immunology in college would take you at least two semesters depending I confess I don t know a whole lot about immunology but I have a hard time believing that one can have too powerful an immune system The greater the immune system the fewer the diseases the higher the rate of survival no ChesneMD wrote Metabolism Great but can be good or bad If the temperatures for the planet drop 10C that s bad for you because you need more weight in general Granted humans live in houses shelter But still There are other reasons for having some weight but more for the ability to put on weight Those with that capability are more adaptive than you The reverse can be true too Reiterating that s not a step in evolution Yes if the temperature of the planet drops 10 degrees then a lot of is going to go down We and all other species on earth are adapted to the current environment so if that happened there would be problems for every species However I should point out that I live in Canada where it is very cold and I have no problem surviving Humankind has overcome the problem of cold through superior intellect But having a higher metabolism is beneficial in the current environment and in the current society It allows me to live a more relaxing lifestyle while still being able to attract mates and reproduce frequently not that I am reproducing frequently but you see my point Modern society values health and body shape and therefore those that are naturally healthy and lean have greater Darwinian fitness Beyond this though high metabolism is just good for health and life it increases energy during the day makes for better sleep at night and helps prevent excess fat build up ChesneMD wrote Strength Irrelevant again It is impossible to say whether it is adaptive or maladaptive It is great to have but is it a progressive step something that would become the norm in humans Who knows Unless there is a life threatening reason for it it won t matter I can t see a way that having greater strength with less required energy or training is maladaptive You say its great to have so therefore wouldn t it be something that people would look for in mates I don t believe that there needs to be life threatening reasons for natural selection Mating choice plays a prominent role But when it comes to life threatening situations when would having superior natural strength put you at a disadvantage If you fall off a cliff but grab on to the edge just in time that extra strength could save your life Or in a war where thousands of people die those who are stronger are much more likely to survive Strength may not play the biggest role in natural selection but it is definitely a factor ChesneMD wrote Eyesight Is great but irrelevant unless having a better eyesight than 20 20 is required Again not a step You re right better eyesight is not required But it is helpful I m sure it means the difference in many driving or hunting accidents Even if a few people live because of better eyesight then it has affected the evolution of the species ChesneMD wrote Evolution is more complicated than simply having better of something that we currently have Unless there is a reason for having it none of it matters It does not mean you are superior to anyone You could be inferior to someone shorter less strength etc I understand that evolution is complicated but the general trend in evolution is betterment of the species through mutation You seem to define evolution as something that increases the survival of the species as a whole but there is more to it than that If a single individual has greater chances of reproduction because of a genetic mutation then that mutation can and will play a role in the future evolution of that species as long as that trait can be passed along ChesneMD wrote As for a personal touch My father has a high IQ My brother does as well They are both considered geniuses My mother is gifted My IQ is superior to my family My father is an engineer and major in the U S Army Reserve My brother is lazy He does nothing but play video games That is not a quality someone should find attractive He is trying to go to community college in the spring so at least that is a good thing People with exceptional intelligence are often underachievers who have trouble functioning in society I ve been the same way for a lot of my life This is due mostly to the fact that society is built a certain way for a certain group of people and if you don t lie within that group you are going to struggle One analogy would be to let a family of monkeys raise a human child That human child has the capability of being much more intelligent than the monkeys but it will probably grow up have serious mental issues and won t ever be able to live up to its full potential This is much more extreme than a gifted human being raised in and around average humans but it still works Anyway I ve probably gone into way too much detail in this reply Don t feel that you need to respond in kind I just enjoy discussing these things Reply with quote Cat Cat Posts 635 Joined Thu Feb 14 2008 7 40 pm Tue Nov 22 2011 7 41 pm Two of you here claim superior intelligence I have a question for you about longevity Longevity has two components genetic and environmental IamAnAlien said I believe that human evolution is shifting towards a human of greater intelligence and longevity How do you know how much of the apparent increase in life span is due to genetic changes product of evolution and how much is due to environmental conditions lessening of negative selection pressures Isn t it just as possible that if you were to transplant a newborn from 300 years ago into today s society he she would live much longer than average of our time Reply with quote ChesneMD ChesneMD Posts 21 Joined Wed Nov 16 2011 1 40 pm Location Vanderbilt University and Medical Center Re Tue Nov 22 2011 10 44 pm Cat wrote Two of you here claim superior intelligence I have a question for you about longevity Longevity has two components genetic and environmental IamAnAlien said I believe that human evolution is shifting towards a human of greater intelligence and longevity How do you know how much of the apparent increase in life span is due to genetic changes product of evolution and how much is due to environmental conditions lessening of negative selection pressures Isn t it just as possible that if you were to transplant a newborn from 300 years ago into today s society he she would live much longer than average of our time I don t claim superior intelligence but tests suggest I am I know that I know more academics and etc than most people but I don t think I am more intelligent I hate even saying I am smart because unless prompted I act like a goofball I don t take life seriously unless there is a reason As for the quote you selected from Alien What reason would intelligence and longevity have for being traits that are being selected for I personally and many anthropologists believe that we are at a point currently where we are reiterating stagnant We will see

    Original URL path: http://www.biology-online.org/biology-forum/about23412.html (2016-02-17)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Biology-Online • View topic - Am I the Next Step in Human Evolution?
    thats kind of like running around in an open world rpg without doing the missions So in the future everyone will follow the main storyline of Skyrim As for some of the things you suggested are the next steps in an evolutionary process lol 1 height chicks dig guys of all heights Fortunately because of our brains we don t have to end up in either gigantism or dwarfism What chicks dig is confident guys and confidence is associated more and more with intelligence rather than the right physicality Thats because the good jobs require us to be intelligent enough to function and not intelligent enough to question and chicks want providers with good jobs for their babies unless an individual chick has decided that she can provide for her babies herself in which case she ll bang a few boy toys before having some babies and settling down or buying some cats and watching tv forevermore whichever one happens first 2 Eyesight Really Why Why would we need 20 20 vision or better if we re no longer being stalked by lions Think about it bud It doesn t make any sense 3 I don t know but three is a nice number Now as a conclusion We are not evolving in the direction of some super intelligent giant hunter leader man That train has left the station If anything we are evolving in the direction of lazy shallow sex crazy hive mentality having follower or something But more than likely we re not evolving in any particular direction at all because of how incredibly large our human population has become The larger the population the less of a chance for mutations and next steps to take hold on a large enough amount of people and thus for them to stick around in our genes Imagine there s this guy and he s born with a digestive tract that keeps him perfectly healthy no matter how much macdonalds he eats brain chemistry that makes him perfectly happy with working hard at a decent job and having more facebook friends than real friends and the confidence to think that he s better than Leonardo DaVinci even though he isn t by my standards which makes him hit on any chick he wants to hit on So imagine this one guy out of 6 billion who might very well be the most beneficial next step for our disease like species if it wants to someday populate the whole universe He ll probably bang some real hotties maybe impregnate one of them and then marry her and he ll probably get promoted a few times for being such an efficient team player Happy and content at having a hot wife a house a decent job health etc he ll have two kids and raise them to be content with life as well Those two kids may or may not share some of his beneficial genes If they do share some of them they ll have kids some day too and the genes will get even more diluted in the giant petri dish that is the world They ll get diluted by people who get fat and have heart attacks because heart attacks kill us well beyond the normal age for having kids they ll get diluted by people who are depressed a lot and feel lonely because of a lack of community because one way to be a part of a community is to start a family a mini community they ll get diluted by people who are too independent and intelligent to accept the status quo and who take risks and have new ideas although many entrepeneurs fail chicks still dig rebels and have kids with them and they ll get diluted by neanderthals too good looking mentally handicapped people This discussion is old so I hope that at least one person will read the book that I just wrote haha Over and out Andy Reply with quote JackBean JackBean Posts 5694 Joined Mon Sep 14 2009 7 12 pm Tue Oct 09 2012 4 15 pm So Your point is except that we geniuses have no idea what to say Reply with quote Luxorien Luxorien Posts 55 Joined Fri Jan 20 2012 1 27 am Mon Oct 15 2012 8 05 pm This has got to be the weirdest thread I have ever seen Reply with quote sanumanu sanumanu Posts 1 Joined Fri Nov 29 2013 3 05 pm Fri Nov 29 2013 3 25 pm The next step in human evolution is increased awareness and consciousness With it one can connect with others understand them without need of conventional communication So IAmAnAliean do you sense something similar Even at elementary level are you able to guess what s going on in other person s mind by just observing his her body language Some can claim that this is just common sense but those who are evolved more aware get better insight into minds of other people The next level after this is to sit quietly close your eyes and try to feel your surroundings Living as well as non living Near by as well as distant If you can sense or feel you are connected it s just wow Reply with quote badgertoes badgertoes Posts 2 Joined Sat Dec 28 2013 8 05 am Re Am I the Next Step in Human Evolution Sat Dec 28 2013 8 31 am Although this thread is very old this is an interesting question to me that I want to dissect piece by piece You may just be comparing your aging to men from different regional backgrounds Many men of european descent do not develop much hair until well into their 20s or even 30s There are some I know who cannot grow a full beard in their late 20s and have minimal body hair They also appear young But there are also others who appear old and have no body hair

    Original URL path: http://www.biology-online.org/biology-forum/about23412-12.html (2016-02-17)
    Open archived version from archive



  •