Scientific Forums


Pages: (40) « First ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... Last »  ( Go to first unread post )

Add reply · Start new topic · Start new poll


> Life's Drive And Purpose, Choice Of Our Life's Purpose Is OURS
HenisDov
Posted: Feb 16 2008, 08:12 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 694
Joined: 14-September 05

Positive Feedback: 46.43%
Feedback Score: -26


The Genome Is A Communal Organism
Consisting Of Member Gene Organisms


A. "Location matters, even for genes". Change of their location prevents their transcription.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/200...m-lme021108.php


B. "From Gene to Protein, Transcription", beautifully illustrated here:

http://www.phschool.com/science/biology_pl...tion/intro.html


C. Here's suggesting that the genome be conceived for what it is, i.e. An Integrated Communal Organism Consisting Of Member Gene Organisms, that need to be 'opened' for RNA polymerase to do its bit, directed and prompted by additional factors all of which are not yet known...

This realization may guide Gene-Genome Biology into an exit onto a route leading to fresh dynamic progress...

Dov Henis
Top
HenisDov
Posted: Feb 19 2008, 05:12 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 694
Joined: 14-September 05

Positive Feedback: 46.43%
Feedback Score: -26


Of Insects And Humans Neural Development

Neural Development Process Similar In Insects And Mammals.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/200...c-bbm021508.php

quote

"In the novel (Drosophila. DH) mechanism postulated by the researchers, there are intermediate progenitors present that divide symmetrically in terms of morphology, but asymmetrically in molecular terms. This latter feature means that cell fate (nature of functions.DH) determinants are segregated into only one daughter cell, leaving the other free to divide several more times, thus amplifying the number of cells generated.

The authors write: “The surprising similarities in the patterns of neural stem and intermediate progenitor cell division in Drosophila and mammals, suggest that amplification of brain neurogenesis in both groups of animals may rely on evolutionarily conserved cellular and molecular mechanisms.”

end quote


Yes, those organisms, these genes, are indeed 'evolutionarily conserved' in both Drosophila and in mammals including humans...and hence the non-surprising similarities of their selected survival mechanisms...

Dov Henis
Top
HenisDov
Posted: Feb 21 2008, 04:12 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 694
Joined: 14-September 05

Positive Feedback: 46.43%
Feedback Score: -26


CNV, Professional Cataract And Verbiage.
Rescue Science From Its Guilds!


A.

CNV = Copy Number Variation

cfv = community family variation

http://www.sanger.ac.uk/humgen/cnv/


The questions that drive CNV and cfv researches are:

1.
CNV: How much copy number variation (CNV) exists between human genomes?
cfv: What is the extent of variations/differences between families per 50,000-population per each of the major nations on Earth?

2.
CNV: How best can CNVs be incorporated into whole genome association studies?
cfv: How best can cfv (the above information, systemized) be incorporated into the study of characteristics of major nations?

3.
CNV: What is the contribution of copy number variation to genetic disease?
cfv: What is the contribution of cfv to inter-nationals coexistence problems?

4.
CNV: What is the relative contribution of different mutational mechanisms to CNV?
cfv: What is the relative contribution of different culture-caused human-group-phenotypes to cfv?

5.
CNV: What is the genomic impact of CNV on gene expression?
cfv: What is the evolutionary impact of cfv on the characteristic national phenotypic performances of each of the major nations?

6.
CNV: What role has CNV played in recent human evolution?
cfv: What role has cfv played in recent humanity's evolution?


B. Again, Science Must Be Rescued From Its Guilds (Jan 8 2008)

http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=14988&st=135

After all, CNV is about ORGANISMS, Genes, and about communal associations of organisms, Genomes, and about the state of the organisms and their communes in a phase of their Darwinian Evolution.


Dov Henis
Top
HenisDov
Posted: Feb 27 2008, 04:57 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 694
Joined: 14-September 05

Positive Feedback: 46.43%
Feedback Score: -26


Elephants, Cetaceans, Religion, And Ethics
in a science-informed-based civilization

A.

Feb. 25, 2008
Pretoria, South Africa: South Africa says that it will start killing elephants to reduce their burgeoning numbers...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23341840/


B. Intelligence and culture

- Wikipedia: "There is no universally agreed definition of intelligence. However, a commonly used definition is 'the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience'."

- Intelligence = The core (wordnet.princeton) definition of "intelligence" is "the ability to comprehend, to understand and profit from experience".
These surviving abilities are different for the different genotypes and for the different phenotypes within a genotype, therefore each of those cases has its own unique expression of "intelligence". Intelligence is to culture approximately as essential amino acids are to proteins. Culture evolves in response to circumstances via the use of intelligence and to the extent and scope feasible by the extent and scope of intelligence.

- Cognition = the capability, process or act of thinking, questioning and analysing. Cognition is Cultural, is Biological. Cognition derives from culture. Culture is a biological attribute of ALL organisms regardless of size or complexity.

- Culture = the totality of ways of the organisms' dealing with (awareness of, reaction to, manipulation of, exploitation of) its environment.


C. Present ethical and non-ethical killing

Devouring of organism by organism is an innate evolutionary survival format. Humans, having evolved within their genotype a variety of different phenogroups' cultures comprising also artifactual codes of ethics, have not involved ethical consideration in regards to either killing and/or consuming other organisms.

Humans' avoidance of cannibalism, some humans' burrial of their dead, some humans' avoidance of own-kin killing, and license to kill and consume other organisms have been founded and developed historically first via the human artifact religion, essentially a frame-of-mind and system of ascribing Inflated High individual and group Self-Esteem (IHSE) as means for the phenogroup survival. With accelerating development of human culture and accompanying increased welfare demands, follows competition for resources between IHSE phenogroups. In the course of this competition the different phenogroups evolve at different rates and in different directions, per their unique circumstances and capabilities, arriving by now at the present state of humanity on Earth.

Even if we comprehend today the historical process of our evolution, we members of each human phenogroup still have embeded in us the IHSE base of ethics. This embeded ethics criterion grades the extent of our empathy unevenly along a scale of social strata within our community and along a scale of nations-phenogroups on Earth.

Our Ethics Scale in regards to non-human organisms is based on our concept of the extent of cognition of those organisms. The closer their cognitive characteristics are to ours the more empathy we feel with them. Thus our highly empathic attitudes towards elephants and some primates and towards the Cetaceans, the 'brainy' ex-mammals ocean creatures. We feel more uneasy about killing them than about killing less 'brainy' cratures, farther from us on the scale of having cognition.


D. Future ethics of killing, in science-based civilization

?????????????????


Dov Henis









Top
HenisDov
Posted: Feb 28 2008, 12:16 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 694
Joined: 14-September 05

Positive Feedback: 46.43%
Feedback Score: -26


...continued former posting...

D. Future ethics of killing non-humans in science-based civilization

If, whenever, eventually, Earth's humanity survives to base-found a united Earth civilization based on science-informed rational...in such a maybe far future methods other than killing (some available now, already) will probably be applied for interferring with natural Darwinian course of evolution...

Dov Henis
Top
HenisDov
Posted: Mar 1 2008, 08:00 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 694
Joined: 14-September 05

Positive Feedback: 46.43%
Feedback Score: -26


Culture Is Biology, It Imprints Genetics


I. Quotes from "Chimp and human communication trace to same brain region"

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/200...p-cah022108.php

" An area of the brain involved in the planning and production of spoken and signed language in humans plays a similar role in chimpanzee communication.

This might be interpreted in one of two ways:

One interpretation of our results is that chimpanzees have, in essence, a ‘language-ready brain'. By this, we are suggesting that apes are born with and use the brain areas identified here when producing signals that are part of their communicative repertoire.

Alternatively, one might argue that, because our apes were captive-born and producing communicative signals not seen often in the wild, the specific learning and use of these signals ‘induced’ the pattern of brain activation we saw. This would suggest that there is tremendous plasticity in the chimpanzee brain, as there is in the human brain, and that the development of certain kinds of communicative signals might directly influence the structure and function of the brain."


II. Quotes from earlier postings in this thread:

Culture Is Biology, It Affects Genetics

The Common Mistake: Genetic Changes Have NOT Made Us Human; Human Culture Has Been Changing Our Genetics.

A. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/200...u-ahe120607.php

Are humans evolving faster?
Findings suggest we are becoming more different, not alike.

B. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/200...w-gsp120507.php

Genome study places modern humans in the evolutionary fast lane.

C. http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLB..._Q--?cq=1&p=207

From my postings way back in 2005, which cites genetic evidence/demonstration of the workings of human cultural evolution:

- From Science, 2 Sept 2005: "Page's team compared human and chimp Ys to see whether either lineage has lost functional genes since they split.

The researchers found that the chimp had indeed suffered the slings and arrows of evolutionary fortune. Of the 16 functional genes in this part of the human Y, chimps had lost the function of five due to mutations. In contrast, humans had all 11 functional genes also seen on the chimp Y. "The human Y chromosome hasn't lost a gene in 6 million years," says Page. "It seems like the demise of the hypothesis of the demise of the Y," says geneticist Andrew Clark of Cornell University in Ithaca, New York.

Chimp's genome has been continuing survival by physiologically adapting to changing environments.

- But look at this: From Science, Vol 309, 16 Sept 2005, Evolving Sequence and Expression:"An analysis of the evolution of both gene sequences and expression patterns in humans and chimpanzees...shows that...surprisingly, genes expressed in the brain have changed more on the human lineage than on the chimpanzee lineage, not only in terms of gene expression but also in terms of amino acid sequences".

Surprisingly...???

Human's genome continued survival mainly by modifying-controling its environment.

- And I suggest that detailed study of other creatures that, like humans, underwent radical change of living circumstances, for example ocean-dwelling mammals, might bring to light unique effects of culture-evolution processes and features of evolutionary implications parallel to those of humans.


D. Chapter II, Life, Tomorrow's Comprehension:

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLB..._Q--?cq=1&p=372

Natural Selection Is A Two Level Interdependent Affair

1) Evolution ensues from genome/genes modifications ("mutations"), inherently ever more of them as new functional options arise for the organism.

2) Modifications of genome's functional capabilities can be explained by the second-stratum organism's culture-life-experience feedbacks to its genome, its prime/base organism. The route-modification selection of a replicating gene, when it is at its alternative-splicing-steps junctions, is biased by the feedback gained by the genome, the parent organism, from the culture-life-experience of its progeny big organism. THIS IS HOW EVOLUTION COMES ABOUT.

3) The challenge now is to figure out the detailed seperate steps involved in introducing and impressing the big organism's experiences (culture) feedbacks on its founding parents' genome's genes, followed by the detailed seperate steps involved in biasing-directing the genes to prefer-select the biased-favored splicing.

4) I find it astonishing that only very few persons, non-professional as well as professional biologists-evolutionists, have the clear conception that selection for survival occurs on two interdependent levels - (a) during the life of the second-stratum progeny organism in its environment, and (b) during the life of its genome, which is also an organism. Most, if not all, persons think - incorrectly - that evolution is about randomly occurring genes-genome modifications ("mutations") followed with selection by survival of the progeny organism in its environment. Whereas actually evolution is the interdependent , interactive and interenhencing selection at both the two above levels.


E. Eventually

Eventually it will be comprehended that things don't just "happen", "mutate", randomly in the base-prime organism, genome, constitution; the capability of the base-prime organisms to "happen" and "mutate" is indeed innate, but things "happen" and "mutate" not randomly but in biased directions, affected by the culture-experience feedback of the second level multi-cell organisms (or the mono-cell communities).

Dov Henis

Top
HenisDov
Posted: Mar 5 2008, 04:46 AM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 694
Joined: 14-September 05

Positive Feedback: 46.43%
Feedback Score: -26


Parochial Bacterial Viruses

Surprised To Find Parochial Bacterial Viruses?

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/200...u-bst030408.php


I.

Why the surprise?

"Darwin's evolution" started with the occurrence, genesis, of Earth life and has been going on since then in ALL Earth's organisms.

II.

From "Life, Tomorrow's Comprehension" at

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLB..._Q--?cq=1&p=372

Chapter I

Life, A Real Virtual Affair, Its Drive And Purpose

A. Life's Fractal Evolution

The observation of the CBF1 switch, from
http://www.physorg.com/news107357572.html

contributes to my view of the following major fractal chronological several-10^8-years macro layers of Life's evolution:

1 - Individual independent genes evolve into cooperative interdependent gene
aggregates.
2 - The outer cell's membrane (OCM) evolves as the first and major multi-
functional organ of the gene aggregates/genomes.
3 - Individual cells evolve into symbiotic systems.
4 - Evolution of multicellular organisms.

The biggest hindrance of scientific, and even technological, progress in comprehension and exploitation of Biology is the avoidance to accept-regard genes-genomes as organisms. And equally hindering is the lack of a term for genes-genome that explicitly and clearly defines them as organisms, as The Prime Cardinal Earth Life Organisms, distinguished from all cellular secondary stratum organisms.

This avoidance, which is fraught with implications about the nature of life, is also the biggest hindrance of human existential and social progress.

B. Viruses, Too, Are Bona Fide Organisms

Evolution is always in the direction of more effective survivability; however, this is not always in the direction of more complexing for coping with changing environments and competition. In a stable nutritious environment, like in Earth's oceans, coping with vital requirenments, evolution, is in the opposite direction, simplify tooling and means.

It is plain common sense that viruses, even Viroids and Virusoids, nothing more than single strands of DNA or RNA, sometimes only 200-300 nucleotides long, are organisms as alive as we are, evolved at life genesis era and selected for survival in forms, composition and capabilities by living, and even replicating, off their richer kin. Smart little buggers.


III.

Hence it should not be a surprise that evolution has been going on since life's genesis in ALL Earth's organisms.


respectfully,

Dov Henis

Top
HenisDov
Posted: Mar 7 2008, 08:49 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 694
Joined: 14-September 05

Positive Feedback: 46.43%
Feedback Score: -26


Natural Laws, Whence And How They Come About

A.

The term "natural laws" is still an enigma despite the continuous efforts of Science and Theology to define it and to give a meaning to it; even though we are embodiments of it and refer to it profusely we are still far from comprehending it.

Linguistically the "laws of nature" are empirical or scientific generalizations that describe empirically or scientifically observed and defined recurring facts or events or processes in nature.

The prime yet unanswered question about the laws of nature is "whence and how natural laws come about".


B.

I do not attempt to search/review/discuss/assess the many proposed conjectures-answers to the subject question. Just suggesting my own conjecture:

Singularity and D-Infinity, maximum cosmic space expansion since Big Bang, are the alternating cosmic start-and-end states. The cosmos alternates between expansion and impansion. The in-between state is a metastable state, which is an everyday commonsense experience, that the denser the compacting goal the more energy need be invested and, vice versa, the more thorough the disintegration the higher the amount of energy released. It seems that E=mC^2 is a specific case of the cosmic (and universal) process E=Total[m(1+D)] where D is the Distance from Big Bang point and the sum is of all spatial values of D from D=0 to D=selected value.

[BTW, (Nov 9 2006), following Newton (1) gravity is decreased when mass is decreased and (2) acceleration of a body is given by dividing the force acting upon it by its mass. By plain common sense the combination of those two 'laws' may explain the accelerating cosmic expansion of galaxy clusters, based on the above E/ m/ D suggested relationship.]

Since the Universe (including its sub-systems, also Life) is a continuously evolving fractal system, ergo energy is the base element of everything. Cosmic evolution is evolution of energy. At the beginning of the present cosmic cycle was the energy singularity. At its end there will be a small amount of mass and an infinite dispersion of the beginning energy. In-between, the universe undergoes continuous evolution, consisting of myriad energy-to-energy and energy-to-mass-to-energy transformations.

Cosmic impansion will come about to replace expansion and evolve towards singularity when gravity will begin to overcome expansion, when the strain of the stretching space-time matrix will no longer be overcome by the continuously diluting expansion forces.


C.

So whence and how do natural laws come about?

The laws of nature are products of the cosmic evolution, the evolution of energy, that consists of myriad energy-to-energy and energy-to-mass-to-energy transformations.


D.

And a relevant minor question is "who hijacks science"?, who claims-pretends to have the Scientific Answers that we do not have?

The answer to this question is that the hijackers are, broadly, of two general types:

- those who consider themselves, or are considered by others, to be scientists, but posit as scientific findings conjectures that involve some degree of bone fida scientific consideration, and

- those who consider themselves, or are considered by others, to be theologians, and posit that all scientific matters already discovered and yet to be discovered emanate from their deity that is the creator of the cosmos including whatever is brought to our comprehension via science.


conjecturing,

Dov Henis

Top
HenisDov
Posted: Mar 9 2008, 04:22 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 694
Joined: 14-September 05

Positive Feedback: 46.43%
Feedback Score: -26


Gene Effects Skin Color With Protein Ion-Exchanger

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/200...b-sif022008.php

In general, people with ancestors from sunny regions have darker skin than people with ancestors from regions with less sunlight. Skin color is determined by the amount and type of the pigment melanin in the skin.

In 2005 researchers identified a gene called SLC24A5 as a key determinant of skin color. Rebecca Ginger and colleagues now confirm that the protein product of this gene (NCKX5) is an ion exchanger; it exchanges sodium for calcium across a membrane, regulated by potassium. But unlike other NCKX proteins, they found that NCKX5 is not present on the cell surface, but internally in a compartment known as the trans-Golgi network. This compartment is where new proteins and vesicles are processed, modified and sorted.

When the researchers knocked out NCKX5 in melanocytes (the skin cells that manufacture the melanin pigment), melanin production decreased dramatically. They also demonstrated that changing the ancestral amino acid (alanine) at position 111 to the European form associated with lighter skintone (threonine) reduced NCKX5’s exchanger activity.

While they plan on teasing out the exact biological mechanism, Ginger and colleagues propose that NCKX5 could play a direct role in the trafficking decisions that influence the assembly of melanosomes, the specialized cell vesicles where melanin is produced. Alterations that increase or decrease NCKX5 effectiveness would be expected to influence total skin pigment production.

Fwd by DH
Top
HenisDov
Posted: Mar 10 2008, 02:24 AM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 694
Joined: 14-September 05

Positive Feedback: 46.43%
Feedback Score: -26


Darwinism Starts With Life'w Day One, With The Archaea
History Of Life In Structure Of Transfer RNA


A.

Quote from http://www.physorg.com/news124097235.html

The new analysis also indicates that viruses emerged not long after the archaea, with the superkingdoms eukarya and bacteria following much later – and in that order. This finding may influence the ongoing debate over whether viruses existed prior to, or after, the emergence of living cells, Caetano-Anoll?s said.

“This supports the idea that viruses arose from the cellular domain,” he said.


B.

Quote from http://genomebiology.com/2000/1/3/reviews/1020/

Archaea (as exemplified by Pyrococcus sp.) replicate their circular genome from a single DNA replication origin as do bacteria, even though they may use eukaryotic-like proteins to do so. This single-origin replication is unlike human's, as our DNA replication depends on initiation at thousands of different origins. The multiple sites of initiation are essential for timely replication of large eukaryotic genomes. The archaebacterial Pyrococcus genomes by contrast are smaller even than that of Escherichia coli, so perhaps we should not be surprised that archaea can replicate like E. coli using a single origin.


C. Quote from
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLB..._Q--?cq=1&p=372

Viruses, Too, Are Bona Fide Organisms

Evolution is always in the direction of more effective survivability; however, this is not always in the direction of more complexing for coping with changing environments and competition. In a stable nutritious environment, like in Earth's oceans, coping with vital requirenments, evolution, is in the opposite direction, simplify tooling and means.

It is plain common sense that viruses, even Viroids and Virusoids, nothing more than single strands of DNA or RNA, sometimes only 200-300 nucleotides long, are organisms as alive as we are, evolved at life genesis era and selected for survival in forms, composition and capabilities by living, and even replicating, off their richer kin. Smart little buggers.


D. Quote from
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLB..._Q--?cq=1&p=409

Factors Involved In Extended Historical Darwinism:

- Earth Life Is A Real Virtual Affair; it pops in and out of existence in its matrix, which is the energy constrained in Earth's biosphere .

- Genes are organisms, interdependent members of genes communes, genomes, all continuously undergoing evolution directed towards survival as long as possible, for maintaining Earth's biosphere as long as possible.

- Culture is a ubiquitous biological entity and is the major effector of genetic evolution, of capabilities and attributes selected for survival.

- The major course of natural selection is not via random mutations followed by survival, but via interdependent, interactive and interenhencing selection of routes by genes at their alternative-splicing-steps junctions, effected by the cultural feedback of the multicells organism or community to their prime genes-genome.

- Evolution of life is but a minute component of the evolution of the universe. Cosmic evolution is the evolution of energy. Life, like all objects and processes and natural laws in the universe, are - since none in exsistence at singularity - products of evolution and are continuously further evolving. Everything in the cosmos is fractal, rehappens on many scales, and is continuously evolving. Each and every system in the universe continuously evolves within the total universal evolution and all the systems' evolutions are intertwined and within it life's evolution is the evolution of genes-genomes, in a losing attempt to survive, to maintain - as long as possible - pockets of constrained energy that would otherwise and anyhow eventually expand and dilute with the whole mass and energy of the cosmos...


Dov Henis

puzzled why even Darwinians do not comprehend that Darwinism starts all the way back with Life's day one, with the archaea...
Top
HenisDov
Posted: Mar 10 2008, 03:47 AM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 694
Joined: 14-September 05

Positive Feedback: 46.43%
Feedback Score: -26


Darwinism Starts With Life's Day One, Even Prior To Archaea


I realize that in my earlier post I did not go all the way back to Life's genesis. Correcting my last statement:

puzzled why even Darwinians do not comprehend that Darwinism starts all the way back with Life's day one, with the primal not-yet-genomed-celled genes even pre-archaea...

Dov Henis
Top
HenisDov
Posted: Mar 13 2008, 05:42 AM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 694
Joined: 14-September 05

Positive Feedback: 46.43%
Feedback Score: -26


Structures Constructed From Organsims' Constituents


A. Nano-Scale Structures Constructed From DNA

http://www.physorg.com/news124550976.html

The "tiny strings of DNA that assemble by themselves" are referred to as:

- blueprint for life

- basic building blocks of all life, of living organisms

- molecular-scale biomaterials

- renewable resource and, by definition, biodegradable...


B. The day will come

Nothing "ethically" wrong with constructing structures from organisms' constituents, but why O why insist obstinately on referring to them in terms that avoid acceptance of their factual nature-identity?

The day will come on which humans will realize what they are, what their constitution is, what their composition is, whence they come, where they end-up. They will then realize that the mode and nature and contents of life of human communities and individuals are theirs to plan and carry out...


Dov Henis

PS: Yes. DNA (and RNA) are constituents of organisms, genes are organisms, and genomes are communes of interdependent organisms... DH

This post has been edited by HenisDov on Mar 13 2008, 05:47 AM
Top
HenisDov
Posted: Mar 17 2008, 05:35 AM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 694
Joined: 14-September 05

Positive Feedback: 46.43%
Feedback Score: -26


Dear Darwinists,
It Is Culture That Drives Evolution


This March 1 2008 posting

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...65&#entry316631

was titled "Culture Is Biology, It Imprints Genetics".


By plain common sense it is therefore culture, the ubiqitous biological entity, that drives earth life evolution.


Dov Henis
Top
HenisDov
Posted: Mar 19 2008, 12:39 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 694
Joined: 14-September 05

Positive Feedback: 46.43%
Feedback Score: -26


Bird Brains Suggest How Vocal Learning Evolved?
It Did Not Evolve As You Suggest!


A.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/...80311215702.htm

Quote:

Based on the data, we think that the brain has a pre-existing substrate, namely a forebrain motor pathway, that led to the evolution of similar vocal learning pathways in three different bird families," Jarvis said.

The connection between movement and vocal learning also extends to humans, Jarvis suggests. Human brain structures for speech also lie adjacent to, and even within, areas that control movement. "We can make a plausible argument that in humans, our spoken language areas also evolved out of pre-existing motor pathways," he said. These pathways, he believes, date back to the common ancestor of reptiles, birds and mammals...
end quote.

B. Is the view of Science dimmed by pre-Copernicus/Galileo cataract?
Or are 21st century scientists orthodox religious people?

"We can make a plausible argument that in humans, our spoken language areas also evolved out of pre-existing motor pathways," he said. ""pre-existing motor pathways"!

At some time "pre" there was not "existing", and sometime somehow the "existing" must have come into being...

When will 21st century Science realize that IT IS CULTURE THAT DRIVES EVOLUTION and not evolution that drives culture, that the daily experiences (culture) of the life forms, the 2nd stratum organisms, imprint the modifications ("mutations") in the prime stratum life organisms, the genes?

Dov Henis

Top
Capracus
Posted: Mar 19 2008, 01:20 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 5375
Joined: 5-October 06

Positive Feedback: 75.56%
Feedback Score: 41


QUOTE (HenisDov @ Mar 19 2008, 12:39 PM)
When will 21st century Science realize that IT IS CULTURE THAT DRIVES EVOLUTION and not evolution that drives culture, that the daily experiences (culture) of the life forms, the 2nd stratum organisms, imprint the modifications ("mutations") in the prime stratum life organisms, the genes?
HenisDov, I think it would be more accurate to say that culture is one of the many driving forces of evolution.
Top

Topic Options Pages: (40) « First ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... Last »

Add reply · Start new topic · Start new poll


 

Terms of use