Ontogeny

Thanks for your reply, it helped to explain things further Cheers

Ghee...wow Thanks for posting, very interesting!

WOW, thanks for the explanation...I had no idea:doh: I always imagined most CO2 to be produced through the break down of organic matter, ruminants and more recently by us in the form of polution! Plate tectonics never occured to me...you learn every day:D

Yeah, thanks for your reply, appreciate it! I do get what you're saying and I thought that might be what was meant, I would have just thought that plate tectonics would not account for a lot of the CO2 in the atmosphere! Cheers

I just read an article in New Scientist and there is mention of :...the advent of plate tectonics that help regulate carbon dioxide. Could someone please explain how this correlation comes about? It doesn't make sense to me!

I am no specialist, but I do think it makes sense. They are not talking about the growth phase, but stating that the zygote continues to divide mitotically...mitosis has 2 growth phases G1 and G2 and interphase is part of mitosis.

UUUpppssss, sorry you missunderstood me! I thought your post was quite funny actually, not because I thought it was wrong or silly, but because it was such an obvious thing to point out and noone else did! Soap, definitely:D

'We actually don't know this, we speculate this is true. Take the Giraffe's neck for example. If neck length is explained by selective advantage how does one account for the fact that female giraffe's are about two feet shorter than males? What part of selective advantage accounts for that?' How about sexual selection? Intrasexual selection accounts for the difference in body size between males and females of the species!

Yes, I remember hearing about this, it's certainly very interesting! Human sexuality is definitely a more complex issue that one would rightly expect, but culture should never be underestimated I guess. We certainly are a complicated bunch!

I'm glad you brought culture into the discussion and I definitely agree with your point in regards to the influence of culture on our sexual behaviour. It is well proven that many animals formerly regarded as being monogamous have now been proven to be far from...Black Swans being a prime example;)

Haha, but I guess it's first hand research though Speaking from an evolutionary standpoint I still maintain that the sex drive of females would be lower! Females do not increase their fitness by having many sexual incounters, but only by choosing fit males to father their offspring...obviously humans do not fall as neatly into this statement...maybe this is why you and I are having our little debate!

Fair enough, I do see your point, but being a woman, from an observational stand point, I do feel that 'in general' females are not as highly sexed as males! I do not have actual data to back up my point, but taking hormonal changes into account I think it makes sense that on the whole we are not as highly driven, nor would it make evolutionary sense if we were! Anyway, that's just my humble opinion and you are a lucky man if you have experienced proof to the contrary;)

Hello Bergen, I think the main point to remember is that there is no 'forknowledge' in evolution, everything you see around you is the result of the generally very slow adaptation of animals to changes in their environment. Animals never 'needed' longer necks as such, but the animals whos necks happened to be longer due to small genetic changes would have been better able to take advantage of ecological niches in which food was more readily available to them and those animals would have been able to survive more easily than the ones who had to compete for more limited resources at ground level for example. It follows that animals with longer necks who live in areas with trees, let's talk Giraffe for example, would be able to survive and produce and feed offspring more readily as well and their genes would be passed on to their offspring and so on and so on...slowly developing the longer necks we see today and mind you this process would have taken many generations to take place... We need to remember that changes in the evironment lead to the opportunity for change and many animals and possibly humans included never manage to adapt to change as fast as necessary to ensure the survival of a species!

Haha, yeah I bet...we should not forget that in our modern world us ladies can let loose without the consequences that mother nature would normally throw at us;) But I would still make the point that 'on average' the sex drive of males would be higher than that of females...let's face it men think about sex how many times a day?

I would say that on avarage males display a higher sex drive to females, as the biological fitness of males is closely linked to the number of offspring that he may produce, while females can only benefit by being 'choosy' and not mating with just anyone! The possible cost of sex for women is so much higher than for males! If women had the high sex drive of males, it would be much more likely for them to just mate with any Dick, Tom or Harry instead of selecting the more 'fit' male that will also provide for the child and mother...which begs the question why so many 'ladies' have sex with unemployed, uneducated loosers