posted
National Geographic's latest issue includes a tidbit about another new dinosaur-bird found in China. NG will, in an upcoming issue, provide another detailed look at the new fossils closing the dinosaur / bird gap (and sending C'ers into apopleptic fits). Of course I will post it all here.
There's also the results of a study which sems to indicate that most (but not all, about 80%) Native Americans are descended from the same family, identifiable by a genetic mutation that differs from all other humans, and ocurred 20,000 - 50,000 years ago.
------------------ "We shall not yield to you, nor to any man." -- Freak, The Mighty.
posted
Which reminds me that there's this really cool looking program about dinosaurs that's on in the UK soon. Must remember to watch it.
------------------ You know, when Comedy Central asked us to do a Thanksgiving episode, the first thought that went through my mind was, "Boy, I'd like to have sex with Jennifer Aniston."
------------------ "Sully, for Shame! And don't be foolish! What are we trying to practice every day? If our friendship depends on things like space and time, then when we finally overcome space and time, we've destroyed our own brotherhood! But overcome space, and all we have left is Here. Overcome time, and all we have left is Now. And in the middle of Here and Now, don't you think that we might see eachother once or twice?" - Jonathan Livingston Seagull
posted
On a side note, I was asking a friend (she's a genius at math and science, her mom is the head of my school's science department, and her dad is a professor at Caltech who graduated from M.I.T.) about her church one day, and it turned out that hers is even more liberal than the Catholic Church! She's Lutheran, and the church she goes to is very liberal. They've nearly accepted homosexuals (as in accepting their sex while the Catholics don't) last time they voted for it; it was only lost by a tiny fraction of votes. I'd love to join her church, except that she lives a bit far away from me.
------------------ "I told you. You're dead. This is the afterlife. And I'm God." --Q to Picard, "Tapestry".
I'll have to wait until you post that info you're talking about, because I apparently don't get Geographic anymore. And I mean the information, as in who found these fossils, how many people, how many fossils, where, when, good descriptions, etc. No opinions.
"There's also the results of a study which sems to indicate that most (but not all, about 80%) Native Americans are descended from the same family, identifiable by a genetic mutation that differs from all other humans, and ocurred 20,000 - 50,000 years ago."
Cool...
That reminds me of something I read a long time ago about mitochondria. Something about showing that mitochondria indicate that there must have been a single female progenator for the entire human race. Anyone know anything about this?
Can we pick up this debate where we left off, or does this have to be on the one topic of dino-bird missing links? If we can pick up where we left off, anyone know where we were? All I remember is that I had just made a point about, if a mutation occured that created a specimine that could not reproduce with other members of the previous species, then the exact same mutation would have to occur in a member of the opposite sex, or the reproductive mutation would die out immediately. I don't think I ever got an answer.
I don't suppose we could get the original thread unlocked and stick all this stuff on the end of it? Might be fun to make it even longer. : )
------------------ For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong. - H. L. Mencken
posted
Actually, this was just supposed to be intended as a "warning" of sorts, and to provoke some people into maybe visiting their local library (assuming the Fundies haven't burned it down) and checking out the magazine on their own.
Just doing my bit as a librarian to encourage their use.
It is a mistaken belief that a SINGLE mutation causes a change in species. It does not. Rather, a group of changes, passed on and accumulated within a single community of organisms, over a long period of time (which can vary depending upon the reproductive cycle of the species in question, and many other things) does. It ain't like the X-Men, toots.
------------------ "We shall not yield to you, nor to any man." -- Freak, The Mighty.
posted
But there will be ONE single mutation that finally causes the creation of a new species. You either can reproduce with your distant cousins or you can't. There's no middle ground. Say you have a group of people that can reproduce with each other (and are thus the same species), and are completely isolated. If one of them has a genetic mutation that makes him a new species, then, by definition, he would be unable to reproduce with anyone else in his little village, unless someone else of the opposite sex has the exact same mutation. I'm sure you'll agree that the chances of that happening are infinitesimal. Thus the reproductive mutation (the ONLY one that makes the mutated individual a different species) would die out within a generation. And before anyone brings up two different isolated groups of people having, and thus passing down, different mutations, it wouldn't really make any difference as far as reproductive mutations go. The mutation that makes the individual a new species would still die out, and the two groups would continue to be able to interbreed.
I'd visit my local library, but it won't be finished for another six months, at minimum. The closest branch library to my house is 25 minutes away in bad traffic and construction, and I don't think I can convince someone to give me a ride just to go look at a magazine. This new branch that's being built, however, is three blocks from my house, which makes me extremely happy. We do use our library, though. I must have checked out 20 books in the last month (mostly Asimov, with a little Clarke some Bear). Librarian? Cool...
------------------ For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong. - H. L. Mencken
posted
Tora said "They've nearly accepted homosexuals (as in accepting their sex while the Catholics don't) last time they voted for it"
Well actually Catholics do accept homosexuals, what they forbid is premartial sex either for both heterosexual or homosexual persons. However are you telling me Tora that Lutherians have nearly accepted the fact of premartial sex amoung homosexuals, because that wouldn't make sense since heterosexuals can't dot that (and it not be a sin I mean).
------------------ HMS White Star (your local friendly agent of Chaos and a d*mn lucky b*st*rd:-) )
posted
"Well actually Catholics do accept homosexuals, what they forbid is premartial sex either for both heterosexual or homosexual persons."
You probably haven't read my posts on this issue before, because I know exactly what the Catholics accept. Note that I said homosexual sex and not just homosexuals themselves.
"However are you telling me Tora that Lutherians have nearly accepted the fact of premartial sex amoung homosexuals, because that wouldn't make sense since heterosexuals can't dot that (and it not be a sin I mean)."
I'll have to ask her again. I specifically asked if they're allowed to marry, but she said that while they can't marry, their sex is allowed.
If anyone has to reply again, do it in a new thread. I didn't want to go off the topic TOO much.
------------------ "I told you. You're dead. This is the afterlife. And I'm God." --Q to Picard, "Tapestry".
posted
I searched the entire Web, but I couldn't find any quotes from the greatest authority on this subject. Yes, The Simpsons episode "Lisa the Skeptic". I'll just have to go from memory.
"I hearby find Lisa Simpson innocent of all charges. I'm also issuing a restraining order on religion. It must remain 200 feet from science at all times."
Brilliant episode.
------------------ "And much of Madness, and more of Sin, and Horror the soul of the plot." -- The Conqueror Worm, by Edgar Allan Poe
posted
First of Two: why would I want to visit my local library? If I wanted to hear crying babies, joking teen-agers, and loud-talking senior citizens I'd go to the mall.
[kidding! I lurk among the local shelves once a week, and every time I'm humbled by how *much* there is to know.]
And are you sure the catholic Church accepts Homosexuals? Because I always thought that was one thing that the bible is crystal clear on, that homosexuals are evil people who have cold black hearts which pump not blood like yours or mine, but rather a thick, vomitous oil that oozes through their rotten veins and clots in their pea-sized brains which becomes the cause of their Nazi-esque patterns of violent behavior, or isn't that true?
I've got a friend that knows that book that the quote about homsexuality being evil and all that is in, but he's not answering the phone right now. Ah well.
------------------ You know, when Comedy Central asked us to do a Thanksgiving episode, the first thought that went through my mind was, "Boy, I'd like to have sex with Jennifer Aniston."
Changes in species are not made within individuals, but within communities, usually ones isolated from the parent group.
One mutation appears, is spread through the community, (but not to the parent group), and becomes common. Then another. Then another. And another, etc.
Eventually, through successive mutations WITHIN the community, it becomes a separate species. Able to interbreed with each other, but no longer with the parent group, because too much genetic change has occured. There is NO point at which one individual becomes unable to breed with other members of the community, because the whole community's genetic code is changing along WITH the individuals'.
------------------ "We shall not yield to you, nor to any man." -- Freak, The Mighty.
posted
Here's a secret about the Catholic Church that might help you understand it, just because the bible says it doesn't mean we follow it. Mostly because Catholics use the Bible and there own Tradition dating back from the earilest days of the Church. Anyway Jesus said basically was about forgiving people and including them into the fold, not excluding them. Finally about Catholic teaching is basically hate the sin, love the sinner, that includes everyone.
------------------ HMS White Star (your local friendly agent of Chaos and a d*mn lucky b*st*rd:-) )
posted
OK, now that I've started a new thread on Catholosism, let's get back to Evolution.
The only way a specimine would be considered a new species would be if a mutation occured WITHIN its reproductive system, making it genetically incompatible with anyone without the mutation. (Well, there could also be some radical mutation in which the number of chromosomes changed, but if the number of chromosomes was lessened, vital DNA code would certainly be lost, and if the number of chromosomes was increased, the DNA would have to be gibberish, and would interfere with the normal DNA. In either case, natural selection would ensure that the mutation was not passed on.) Such a mutation would insure, by it's very nature, that it was not passed down to other generations. No other kind of mutation would create a new species.
------------------ For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong. - H. L. Mencken
Printer-friendly view of this topic
