Dak

if he's telling the truth, it shouldnt be too hard for him to prove. I'd assume that he'd have collected evidence of better quality than a 4bit colour photo at some point, and airbrushing is detectable, so there should be nasa-released satalite photos that have evidence of doctoring that shouldn't be too hard to find. In the abscence of this -- and, say, an explanation of how any UFOs that are present during the real-time viewing of satalite imagery by military people during missions are covered up, I dont really see any reason to believe his claims.

^money, even without spreading adware. http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1838 <-- scroll down to 'The profitable parasite', roughly half-way down the page. By renting the botnet out for spamming, malware installs, (either onto the infected machines, or using them to attempt infections onto other machines), hosting stuff, or by using them to DDoS sites unless they pay you money, a large botnet is a big earner.

Note that, afaik, trisomy-21 isnt the only cause of downs syndrome. The actual cause is likely to be over-expression of a/some gene(s) on chromosome 21. trisomy at that chromosome would obviously cause this, but variouse other things to do with the promoter for these genes would also cause it. In other words, not everyone with downs syndrom is going to have trisomy, so even if trisomy does screw up meiosis, that doesnt mean that all downs syndrome people are going to be infertile.

I'm coming up to my final exams. i'd guess others are busy with revision too. If it's still not done in a month (ie, after my exams), i'll start work on it again.

are you shure? trisomy at chromosome 21 is a cause of downs syndrome, in which case I would have thought that meiosis would fail at a ceckpoint due to the inability of an odd-number of chromosomes to segregate evenly?

sorry.

thus classifying one of shakespears most popular dramas as 'just not good'

look for stretch-marks on female twins to establish which one's given birth. other than that, identical twins aren't identicle due to post-fertilisation recombination, so i suppose you could isolate individual chromosomes, analyse them and figure it out like that probably.

Ah, yes, my bad -- cheers.

this is only really true when looking at just one gene. a gene has a promoter region and a coding region. without going into too much biomolecular detail, the promoter region will 'collect' certain protiens and assemble them around the strand in a way that will initiate transcription (ie, the creation of messenger RNA from the DNA coding region). the other strand, being complimentary, will look like this: ---promoter----coding region---- ---anti-pro-----anti-coding----- Note that, on the lower strand, the 'anti-pro(moter)' and 'anti-coding (region)' will not make sence; also, the lower strand has no active promoter region: so, looking at just one gene, it's true that only one strand gets transcribed*. As you and Yggdrasil said, tho, when looking at the entire genome it's entirely possible to have genes on both strands, like this: ....------------------------> ---promoter----coding region------anti-codeing-----anti-pro--- ---anti-pro-----anti-coding--------coding region----promoter----- ................................................<------------------------ (blue arrow = gene) *actually, this isn't entirely 100% true. sometimes, genes can overlap like this: .....-----------------------------------------------> ---promoter-------------------(AntS)------------(stop)---anti-prom ---anti-prom------------------(stop)------------(AntS)---promoter ............................................<------------------------------ AntS = the complimentary strand to the stop codon. in this case, there is a region of the double-stranded helix where both strands are transcribed becase they both belong to different genes.

It certainly wasn’t anything that Jason had never seen before. Double negative, tripped me up and drew me out of the story. Fix this. Hmm, i dunno... un-double-negitivifying it would give "it was something that jason had seen before", which is a bit flat.

lol, nice one I stand by my 'its silly' comment tho

i'm not sure 4nums is that way inclined, ecoli. happy birthday dude! Also: have a banana, the most comical of fruits.

just a point: firefox puts quote-marks around stuff in <q> tags. this all seems abit silly... what if you wanted to mark stuff with quote marks, and also define it as a quote via HTML? <q>this is a quote</q> wouldnt work, as IE would be missing the quote-marks. <q>"this is a quote"</q> would work on IE, but gives double-quote-marks in FF. thus making it silly

dont worry... senility will fix that soon

indeed (hence the 'i dont know as much'), but it seems a simpler explanation to accept that time is a human invention to facilitate thinking about continual changes in the state of the universe, as opposed to something that actually exists. 'Matter changing' is simpler than 'time exists as a continumn, which is curved, allowing for every possible 'moment' to exist in some manner etc'. Unless there's any actual evidence to suggest simultaniouse* existance of two or more 'moments', (eg, effect before cause, time-travel (other than forwards at 1s/s), or other temporal anomolies), i'm gonna stick with my 'time is a metophore for a dynamic universe' philosophy 'cos of okkrams razor. ------- *not neccesarily simultaniouse by time, but if time exists as a continumn, then surely every possible moment must exist at once along the continumn?

what are you trying to protect? your site or your home computer?

I believe trisomy would explain it, but it would be less likely. see trisomy 21, a cause of down's syndrome

it was for my dissertation, disscussing the possible anti-viral uses of restrictases.

are the pop-ups browser pop-ups, or are they balloon-pop-ups coming from the system tray, or java-script pop-ups? also, what's the name of the fake anti-spyware? Some of these fake anti-spyware's are a pain in the but to remove btw. [edit] also, has smithfraud/smitfraud been mentioned atall, eg by the pop-ups or by spybot?[/edit]

Weee, it's my first ever post Thanks guys, but I've handed my dissertation in now.

what do you mean? [edit] ah, i see. fixed The intro (and edit link) are below the table of contents now [/edit]

Cool. we can use my user page. I've put my stuff up, so edit away! (or blank the whole thing if we want to start afresh).

aww shit. i lifted an image off of wikipedia for my dissertation, and reading this thread, i think i forgot to credit it. nipples. anyway... taking other's work and passing it off as your own is cheating and, if you were a professional, could result in you or your enployer being sued, which is why schools punish you quite abit for it (and it stops you from learning) also, note that copying doesnt just mean copying word-for-word. if you used wikipedia as a template for the article, that still counts as copying. having said that, i'd guess that you used more than one source... your essay and wikipedia disagree about, for example, the habitat size (700 and 100 miles respectively), so i'd suggest gathering all of the sourses that you used and showing your teacher to try and convince him that you didnt just use wikipedia, and treat whatever penalties come from copy/pasting that one paragraph as a lesson. For the record, this is one of many reasons why you should site your sourses within the text1, to cover your own arse against accusations of intelectual theft. [edit]what's 8th grade?[/edit] --------------- 1: Gumby McGoo, 'reasons why you should cite', 1952 <-- like this.

quick point: we should probably ask blike or another admin to check through the letter before we post it if it's going to be on behalf of SFN.