NationStates Jolt Archive

Kind of makes sense as beneficial traits would be passed on.....

Anyway, here is the article.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080118134531.htm

No offense meant to you, TBF, but on behalf of the group of scientists and science-oriented folks here on NSG, I'm going to go ahead and index this one somewhere in The Big Book of Duh.

Kind of makes sense as beneficial traits would be passed on.....

Anyway, here is the article.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080118134531.htm

Why does my crystal ball foresee the invasion of the sceptics and creationists coming here and saying "that's because God did it all"...

Why does my crystal ball foresee the invasion of the sceptics and creationists coming here and saying "that's because God did it all"...

It's because god did it all. ;)

No offense meant to you, TBF, but on behalf of the group of scientists and science-oriented folks here on NSG, I'm going to go ahead and index this one somewhere in The Big Book of Duh.

DM! YOU RETURN THIS THREAD BACK TO TPH RIGHT NOW!!! :eek:

DM! YOU RETURN THIS THREAD BACK TO TPH RIGHT NOW!!! :eek:

I evolved the ability to go back in time and snag the thread from TBF. It's mine now :p

No offense meant to you, TBF, but on behalf of the group of scientists and science-oriented folks here on NSG, I'm going to go ahead and index this one somewhere in The Big Book of Duh.

You know I don't mind being labeled a fool. However, stealing my thread you sombeach!

??? WTF? Whoever said that it was random? Evolution is simply the process in which those creatures with advantageous mutations survive more than the creatures they mutated from. It's determined by the environment they live in. Not random.

You know I don't mind being labeled a fool. However, stealing my thread you sombeach!

I specifically said I did not mean to offend you. And I wasn't trying to imply you are a fool for posting that. However, I just find the discovery by that research team to be a little too obvious for it to have taken 150 years to get there.

??? WTF? Whoever said that it was random? Evolution is simply the process in which those creatures with advantageous mutations survive more than the creatures they mutated from. It's determined by the environment they live in. Not random.

Well, there have been two schools of thought on it for some time, one seeing it as the random selection of random mutations, and the other seeing it as the deterministic selection of random mutations.

I specifically said I did not mean to offend you. And I wasn't trying to imply you are a fool for posting that. However, I just find the discovery by that research team to be a little too obvious for it to have taken 150 years to get there.

Next time I will have to remember to use a :D You were not offending me. ;)

Well, there have been two schools of thought on it for some time, one seeing it as the random selection of random mutations, and the other seeing it as the deterministic selection of random mutations.

Bizarre. I would have thought the whole business of unsuccessful mutations being more likely to result in early deaths and lack of reproductive appeal was sufficiently obviously non-random.

Bizarre. I would have thought the whole business of unsuccessful mutations being more likely to result in early deaths and lack of reproductive appeal was sufficiently obviously non-random.

You'd think that, and I'd think that, which is why I went ahead and put it in The Big Book of Duh. Still, as scientists even the most obvious things often need to be verified. Especially something this important to the field.

Hell, it's the same with math. The proof for 2+2 really does equal 4 can take pages of abstract algebra.

Interesting math trivia: it's possible to prove that any odd-number-sized set of a consecutive series of integers adds up to the the median number times the total number of integers in the set.

I.e. five consecutive numbers add up to the middle number times five, and it's possible to prove this purely algebraically.

Oh, and incidentally, .999 can be shown to = 1.

??? WTF? Whoever said that it was random? Evolution is simply the process in which those creatures with advantageous mutations survive more than the creatures they mutated from. It's determined by the environment they live in. Not random.

I am going to randomly post this:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/NEWS/India/Boy_grows_hairy_tail/RssArticleShow/articleshow/1677716.cms

I personally think it would be an advantage....

Oh, and incidentally, .999 can be shown to = 1.

Lets see it then.

Lets see it then.

1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1

However, at the same time:

1/3 = 0.333 repeating

0.333 repeating + 0.333 repeating + 0.333 repeating = 0.999 repeating.

Therefore, 0.999 repeating = 1

Interesting math trivia: it's possible to prove that any odd-number-sized set of a consecutive series of integers adds up to the the median number times the total number of integers in the set.

Oh god, horrible flashbacks to high school pre-calc... :(

I always figured this was the way evolution worked. Random mutations do occur, and the beneficial ones, in addition to already existing genetic variability, are gradually selected in a process that favors them, producing a gradual trend towards a given trait over time as the genes behind that mutation gradually spread through the population.

Well, there have been two schools of thought on it for some time, one seeing it as the random selection of random mutations, and the other seeing it as the deterministic selection of random mutations.
Not quite. The two schools were the natural selection school (i.e. classis Darwin, natural selection drives evolution) and the neutralist selection school (i.e. evolution occurs from random genes being passed down). Neutralist selection definitely exists, as random genes do pass down simply by chance, but how anyone could argue that natural selection is not the driving force of evolution is beyond me.

1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1

However, at the same time:

1/3 = 0.333 repeating

0.333 repeating + 0.333 repeating + 0.333 repeating = 0.999 repeating.

Therefore, 0.999 repeating = 1

I remember seeing other and cooler ways to do that too

I remember seeing other and cooler ways to do that too

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0.999999 has plenty.

I remember seeing other and cooler ways to do that too

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0.999999 has plenty.

:mad: everyone's a critic.

Conan O'Brien: "Some social scientists have conducted a study and concluded that women are more articulate than men. Well, all I have to say to those scientists is: DUUUH-uhh-UHHH!"

Oh, and incidentally, .999 can be shown to = 1.

Hey! My parlor trick! Hands off! :D

Why does my crystal ball foresee the invasion of the sceptics and creationists coming here and saying "that's because God did it all"...
Because having an affliction as serious as crystal balls make you think all sorts of crazy shit.

Just 'cuz i'm reminded ....
http://www.medpagetoday.com/Dermatology/SkinCancer/tb/8000

You'd think that, and I'd think that, which is why I went ahead and put it in The Big Book of Duh. Still, as scientists even the most obvious things often need to be verified. Especially something this important to the field.

Hell, it's the same with math. The proof for 2+2 really does equal 4 can take pages of abstract algebra.

Interesting math trivia: it's possible to prove that any odd-number-sized set of a consecutive series of integers adds up to the the median number times the total number of integers in the set.

I.e. five consecutive numbers add up to the middle number times five, and it's possible to prove this purely algebraically.

Why do scientists and mathamaticians have to make everything complicated? I used to think that going to the restroom was easy. Then, I read about the science of shit and how our bodies remove it and now it feels like I need an instruction manual just to go #2.

As for the trivia, I noticed that too. It's because the median also happens to be the average.

This article confirms what I've always suspected, those damn female nematode worms just keep getting sexier every year.

Oh, and incidentally, .999 can be shown to = 1.

No it can't, as .999 is not the same as .999...

.999 is .999, .999... is 1

*snip* how anyone could argue that natural selection is not the driving force of evolution is beyond me.

It could certainly be argued that artificial selection is driving evolution every bit as much as natural selection.

It could certainly be argued that artificial selection is driving evolution every bit as much as natural selection.

I've always wondered what future ecosystems would look like, especially if the Earth were to become far more urbanized than it already is. I imagine we might even see the development of an entire population of organisms that survive on artificial sources of chemical energy (e.g. the nylon-eating bacterium).

I've always wondered what future ecosystems would look like, especially if the Earth were to become far more urbanized than it already is. I imagine we might even see the development of an entire population of organisms that survive on artificial sources of chemical energy (e.g. the nylon-eating bacterium).

GIT YER MOUTH OFF MY PANTY HOSE, YOU DAMN DIRTY PROKARYOTE!!

GIT YER MOUTH OFF MY PANTY HOSE, YOU DAMN DIRTY PROKARYOTE!!This HAS to be one of the sexiest posts EVER on NS.
*looks around for Sinuhue*
<.<
>.>

This HAS to be one of the sexiest posts EVER on NS.

Thanks. I was going for witty, but sexy will do. :p

Thanks. I was going for witty, but sexy will do. :p

It's one of the best couplings there is, imnsho. :)

I always thought the mutations were random, but having them stick around in the gene pool was not. >.>

I always thought the mutations were random, but having them stick around in the gene pool was not. >.>

http://www.daily-chronicle.com/articles/2008/01/15/news/news02.txt
?

The mutations themselves are a random process, but whether they get passed on isn't. Let's assume that we have a species of lizards with only one eye, called the Oneeye. Despite having only one eye, they get by enough with sight (their main sense) to live and breed new generations.

Now, thanks to mutations, a bunch of newborn oneeyes have mutations -- half are born with two eyes and half are born with no eyes. The ones with two eyes now have depth perception, so they're better at hunting prey (try looking around with one eye covered if you don't believe me), so they're more likely to last long enough to breed. Meanwhile, the poor guys with no eyes can't see, so they have problem finding food. Very few of them will survive long enough to breed -- and, since its genetic, their offspring will have the same disability.

In short, as time goes by, odds are that eventually most or all of the oneeyes will have two eyes. I know, this is simplified, but the point should get through.

The mutations themselves are a random process, but whether they get passed on isn't. Let's assume that we have a species of lizards with only one eye, called the Oneeye. Despite having only one eye, they get by enough with sight (their main sense) to live and breed new generations.

Now, thanks to mutations, a bunch of newborn oneeyes have mutations -- half are born with two eyes and half are born with no eyes. The ones with two eyes now have depth perception, so they're better at hunting prey (try looking around with one eye covered if you don't believe me), so they're more likely to last long enough to breed. Meanwhile, the poor guys with no eyes can't see, so they have problem finding food. Very few of them will survive long enough to breed -- and, since its genetic, their offspring will have the same disability.

In short, as time goes by, odds are that eventually most or all of the oneeyes will have two eyes. I know, this is simplified, but the point should get through.

Actually the conditions that determine which mutation survives are also random. let's take your lizards one step further. a whole colony of mixed lizards is caught in an earthquake. half fall down a fissure and is trapped in a series of caves far below the surface while the other half remain on the surface.

so the top half would evolve with two eyes because of depth perception, but chances are the dark environment would favor the eyeless since they already rely on other senses for hunting while those with eyes would be blinded.

Of course, the conclusion of 'strong gene survives' isn't random. but the conditions and the mutations themselves are.

Except that a some of the 'oneeyes' have randomly developed echo-location. This makes binocular vision redundant and furthermore enables them to hunt at night when predators find it more difficult to catch them. So they now out-compete the 'twoeyes', which start to disappear.
Therefore , something that appeared to be an evolutionary advantage in a particular niche (two eyes) is turned into a disadvantage by random genetics.
Yet if the echo location had not developed by this randomness, the twoeyes would have seemed been perfectly shaped by 'designed evolution' to fill this niche.
Survival is, of course, a matter of fitting in to a particular set of circumstances. But the process of arriving at that point can still be pretty random.

I replied to South Lorenya at the same time as JuNii - same basic point I think