Genecks

The percentage is a guess. It's a shot-in-the-dark guess. It was my rough, perhaps very poor, interpretation of the most recent SED report and looking at some historical data. Survey of Earned Doctorates: http://www.norc.org/projects/survey+of+earned+doctorates.htm I have a bad habit of using acronyms on this website once I've created a thread already defining the acronym. My apologies.

What do you think this image is showing? Is this image showing cellular development and differentiation, with emphasis placed on developing eyes on drosophilia legs? Image title: Dpp-GAL4/UAS-eyeless source: http://www.ozdros.com/html/drosophila.html

Well put. I like to base my ideas on what we feasibly know. Feasibly, we have a lot of good ideas as how to make an artificial organ, but I don't think we know enough be the theoretical aspects of making them work with the nervous system in order to get them working like biological organs. So, yes, artificial organs will work for now. Given the money and resources, I believe biologists currently have the knowledge, testable hypotheses, and theoretical framework to develop biological organs for people: They just don't have the money nor resources to do such. We can do it with biology. But I think a compromise should be made here: A person in deadly circumstances is more than likely going to need to live on an artificial organ system until the biological one can be made and implanted.

In Illinois, there is a regulated minimum salary that occurs for k-12 teachers. They have to at least be paid that. I've began to agree with the idea of cutting wages as of late. Some work is better than no work (I'm suggesting economic reform in the form of ad-hoc adjustments to salaries nation-wide). Oh, for sure I'd have little saved if possible (maybe a thousand or two). In reference to my first "they don't need to be paid that much" comment:click here. To be serious, I think some of these teachers should have been laid off and honorably rehired with a contract that offers a lower salary. It's a crude business tactic. One I don't agree with if the economy is ok.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mbtp9bG8Q4I&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mbtp9bG8Q4I&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Teachers aren't paid that much. At least, they don't need to be paid that much (K-12 educators). For post-secondary educators, I could see that. Anyway, I wouldn't mind being a K-12 teacher and making maybe $15,000 a year. I'd be undercutting the competition, but it's a nice job, I think (as a biology teacher).

The second one seems ambiguous. In biology, structure relates to function. But then there are chemical signaling pathways, which are more about activation of cellular features than simple physical attributes of the cell, but they can determine whether or not the cell lives. Maybe you could shoot an email and perhaps ask for the person to better describe what is being requested of you. Sometimes educators are being cryptic. At other times, they are poor writers. Filaments are important, though. I can't remember, but I think if one type of filament doesn't form so well, skin is more susceptible to tears. It relates to physical stress, cytoskeleton compression, and more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermediate_filament The phospholipid bilayer also acts as a filter.

I was looking at some statistics for domestic attacks in Newport. Would you say it's just very common for about anyone to get attacked? If that's the case, maybe that's why some people are acting aggressive in the first place: They're afraid of getting attacked, so they act tough and attempt to intimidate others. If that's the case, I'd be sure to not act aggressive back (or even in the first place), because it'd only work to confirm the other person's biases. Seems like a bunch of lose-lose situations. If you've already tried, I suggest you try harder at finding ways to distance yourself from such persons.

Yes, it's absolutely unjustified and criminal for these things to be happening to you. As I think I said in one of my replies to you in another thread, if it starts getting that bad (each week at least), move out. Also, keep in mind, people do not typically kill one another without good cause or reason. Few thugs are stupid enough to kill someone just for looking at them wrong. So, I'm guessing it's down to about once a month? That's not so bad if the local areas and surrounding areas are just as criminal. You have to think about averages and deviancy, etc.. etc.. You know the math. You also have to consider if your life is truly, truly in danger. Maybe work on lining up a job in some other place? In Chicago and Detroit, anyone's life could be in danger. Sad fact, but stray bullets in bad parts of town often hit unsuspecting victims, and those people get killed. I've seen what parts of town those are, and they are pretty run down parts of town. The city has found a nice way to divide itself from them. Rent is cheap, though. But I've got pretty low rent where I am right now. Off base, but maybe there is a conspiracy against you? Did you happen to seriously anger someone powerful and/or hoped-to-be powerful in the past? Or else you could just be a target for the thugs around there, and they've found a way to recognize you. Getting grouped into that class is not good. See if they are any groups with similar concerns as you. Join them. I'm sure a Ph.D holder would be a valuable asset to such a group. And they might have some ideas for you as to how to counter these people are find out how to distance yourself from them. The difference between thieves and thugs is that thieves tend to hang out around areas where they are at least middle-class people and money. Upper-middle class people might not be carrying a wallet on them... or perhaps have no money in their wallet. You might suspect a middle-class person to have some money in the wallet. Weird logic thieves use, but yeah, that's the idea. Maybe you're on someone's trafficking turf. If that's the case, they would more than likely indeed act aggressive toward you. But if you are ignorant and innocent to that area being such, then you really shouldn't have too many problems besides a few aggressive actions. It could also be the time of day that you're out. I've found that in Chicago, crime pops up during certain times of the day. If you want to avoid it, you often travel with other people, meeting certain similar transfer destination, finding transfer points where other groups of people are, and moving about life that way. Sure, you might not be affiliated with those people, but it's kind of like driving on a road with cops who are trying to catch speeders. They pick one out of the group who is speeding and leave the others alone. In other words, it would reduce your probability of being a victim. I'm thinking for the most part that your life is not in danger. Or you could trivialize it all and think there is a giant Fight Club where you live. And the unfortunate case, jimmydasaint, is that sometimes people who are the thugs have low socioeconomics status and get free education. Giving the devil a free ride, as I see it.

Do you think that the estrogen levels in women causes them to have overall pleasure-seeking behavior in life, perhaps more than men? And as always, please keep a civil discussion.

What class are these essays for? For number two, I'm thinking about enzymes. I could also think about filaments. You have fats that can affect the flow of the phospholipid bilayer in relation to temperature. Phospholipids with a double bond in them can also affect flow. I'm not sure what you're learning in your class and what could be expected of you in terms of structures.

Thanks for the one-month input. I'm aiming toward a doctoral program in neuroscience. Although, if I understand the admission politics, then they won't let me in without a year of research, thus brushing me aside into a Master's program, which would more than likely be biology related and cost money. Since I really, really don't feel like shelling out 60K+ for the next three years, and I think it's possible for me to get into a Ph.D program, I am really refusing to pay for a Master's program in order to continue my education. Here is a thread with my views on that: http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=51962

Definitely the issue has been hashed out throughout the past century and/or more. I was curious if persons would input other abstract ideas that may have not been mentioned or arguments I may not have read or thought of. I think in general, people are stating it should not be considered a mental illness in reference the reproductive biological design. Furthermore, it could be assumed that biological design is designed to influence bisexual behavior, which sexual behavior is later narrowed by interaction in society, thus leading to sociobiological development.

Try not to dismiss things so easily, Moontanman. Counter statements rather than dismissing them, or if you could, at least say what parts of the statements have been argued for and against in the thread. You might have something valid here. So, because of the psychological experiences that occur, a person would be heterosexual, even if living a homosexual life. And the reason it's impossible to be purely homosexual is due to neurological programming, thus a person has to be attracted to the opposite sex (even if he/she decides in the end to not have sex with the opposite sex). So, perhaps in a better way, you're saying that genetics and neurological development offer people the ability to be sexually attracted to both genders (everyone is born bisexual), but the members of a population will lean toward actions that increase their fitness. And the decision of which gender to mate with will come from experience with early observation of mating rituals and/or the process of which children are born. Then again, it's not as if we try to get children (at an early age, such as 8) to embrace the idea of sexual activity and giving birth to other children. In some families, this occurs. There tends to be a cultural thing to it, though. It's not really meant to warp the child's mind but to help quickly mature the child for the real world. Nonetheless, there are homosexuals who will never have had sex with a woman. Assume that many are adults, they could understand the idea that they will not be able to reproduce if they are not with women. Perhaps calling a homosexual mentally ill would be similar to calling a felon (who continually ends up in prison) mentally ill. Both reduce their ability to reproduce. In this sense, the cause would be sociobiological. If it is truly the unconscious desire of organisms to reproduce, perhaps calling it a mental illness is too subjective. Something about the biology of the organism has decreased its ability to reproduce. Perhaps a person is less/more susceptible to sociobiological programming than other people. In that case, perhaps the person is not so much mentally ill as the person has genetics that will give him/her less fitness. I've often been told that homosexual men tend to have bad habits, such as drug abuse and a history of violence. Sure, heterosexuals have such bad habits, too. I'm not sure if this may relate to a deficiency in the frontal lobe, which can be responsible for a person being able to conform and/or mimic aspects of society and conduct physical actions. It could be something that occurs during development. Perhaps it's a plastic effect that occurs while growing up in the living world. If the biological definition of mental illness were to solely rely on severely decreased ability to reproduce caused by mental/neurological/emotional issues, then I assume these people would be mentally ill. If this can be reduced to some neurological conformations of the brain, then it should be extremely curious as to why animals have evolved to have such characteristics and what allows such characteristics to occur. Some animals are homosexual and same-gender sex is how reproduction occurs. I'm aware of that. As a note, I'm not prejudice against homosexual men. I find that their existence frees up more women for men who want them.

http://www.cdrinfo.com/sections/news/Details.aspx?NewsId=26358 I just read about this today. I didn't know it existed. Sure, the news is from around November of last year. Regardless, I think a few of you might find it interesting. I'm not seeing anything on Wikipedia about it yet. I'm guessing there is a RAM type of technology for Blu-Ray. Maybe these should be called Blu-RAM discs?

I'm not for a military state nor country, but from studying history, I've often appreciated the idea of the government having people with military experience rather than a bunch of philosophers and rich prodigies. There have to be people who know how to take action. What if Nathaneal Greene had taken place of George Washington?

I don't see it as impossible to not know a law. It has to be written down. Someone who wrote it at least knows it. And, of course, it more than likely needs to be put into effect in order to be enforced. Otherwise, the person who made the law would have to enforce the law and judge the person who broke the law. Notice that there is a separation between the judicial and executive branch in America. Thus, two people have to know that law. If it could be proven that the law was not available to the public, then it could be overruled in a just society. For American taxes... Truthfully, I might have had over $600 in my bank account, been an independent.... and may have had to pay taxes.. I'm not sure.. The money was given to me... But since I wasn't taught about taxes in high school, I admittedly am purely ignorant as to when I have to pay taxes. Yeah, if I've worked and made some money, then some of my wages go to the government if I make over a certain amount. That's typically common sense. I think people should be allowed to admit ignorance on taxes. I really do. All these criminals from the past should not have been put away for tax evasion, because they could have easily claimed ignorance. When people start teaching about when you have to pay taxes... or how you go about finding out when you have to pay taxes... and they implement that in a high school curriculum... then people can no longer claim they're ignorant. About the only laws I learned from high school is that involvement with illicit drugs is illegal, prostitutes are illegal, child abuse is illegal, underage drinking is illegal, driving without a license is illegal, slander and libel are illegal, harassment (I'm not sure how to define harassment) can be illegal, murder is illegal, and attacking people without the act of defending yourself after being hit first is illegal. Things that are in the high school code of conduct... I think it's such bullshit that if you defend yourself and kill the other person in the process that can be considered manslaughter. I wasn't taught that in high school. I'm just defending myself and making sure I don't get killed. Somehow I walk into a society and that's a rule. Do you see what I mean? In Illinois there has often been a saying: You are guilty until proven innocent. Hence, we really want to get the corrupt politicians in Illinois out of office. When educators start teaching law (or how to determine when/if an action is legal/illegal) in high schools rather than "government and the constitution," then people will have a harder time claiming ignorance. The persons should (in a just society) be allowed to walk away innocent and ignorant. Unfortunately, we don't live in a just society. The officer could get away with fining both persons, especially if he/she needs to meet some weird "quota." Quota means to limit something... But we're really going for a requirement to hand out tickets to and/or fine so many people and get so much money. Many police work for the government.. and the government needs to pay its salary..

Well, I think the need to cheat by a truly studious student would be because he/she thinks the system is cheating him/her. That's what I think. The system becomes more competitive each decade. People continually need to distill and retain more knowledge. Otherwise, you're getting some people who didn't study, put in effort, try their best, and so forth. And then when they cheat, and the studious students don't, well... that's just outright, lazy cheating. Sometimes, however, it would appear that professors have taught certain things that are difficult with the hope that some students don't get it right, thus ensuring the professor doesn't give out all As that semester. The professor is held to a standard, and that professor must make sure it occurs: If the professor gives out all As, then that professor allowed grade inflation to occur. Maybe the professor had a good idea of how the nation teaches that subject (went to conferences, read teaching journal, etc..) and taught as such and made things harder than average... yet still everyone got an A. Doesn't matter. Administration might say he's making the university appear to have grade inflation, thus stupid students who can get easy grades... It could be rationalized by the professor that the reason the material becomes harder and more difficult is because the large amount of good grades means that things are too easy... But if we consider a Hellenistic method and figure out what all the other teaching styles are and what material is learned... then we just might notice that the professor is actually making things difficult in order to keep his/her job. Of course, it's so difficult to even find ways to compile such statistics that professors are allowed to say wtfever they want about why things are the difficulty they are... If you can't prove otherwise, then professors can get away with whatever... So, because maybe the Truth or even probable truth cannot easily be assumed, maybe cheating is justified... as many professors refuse to actually publicize their teaching methods, how their exams exist... and so forth... Maybe people are justified in cheating... because the system is ultimately attempting to cheat them. Personally, I know better. I think the system cheats a lot of people. Professors care more about research than teaching. They are humans, they have their own life desires, so I can't blame them for trying to be individuals... But the fact is that they aren't doing their best in teaching, as they don't have the time. So, really, it's administration who is cheating the students (if not the professor and the students), thus I could see why some students (if only they think they are not truly being taught to understand/memorize/learn the material: the system is cheating them) would indeed cheat. Perhaps rather than cheating, we could call this a form of economic and/or information warfare. p.s. sorry about any typos.

I sometimes like to look in the mirror.

Yes, cars can fly. Where have you been, Buck Rogers? Hmm.. What if a chemical substance similar to collagen could be used instead of collagen in order to keep a youthful appearance... and how could a person go about using gene therapy to efficiently insert that into the human body without causing an allergic reaction and, of course, giving a youthful appearance...

Whoops. I seem to have forgotten about the fact that I need to do the GREs. Yeah, that along with actually get 1 year of research experience, which doesn't seem to be happening any time soon. I'm in Chicago, so I've talked with my adviser and decided to check out the big universities in town for research experiences. Either way, I'm taking a full-time load in the summer. So, besides being bogged with studying for those courses, I'm also bogged with this idea of taking the GRE. I'm thinking I won't be able to devote much time to it. I think I have about three months before I have to take the thing. As such, that might indeed be enough time to actually study for it. I'm not sure. I'm thinking I'm going to take the general one, and I'm also going to take the biology subject GRE. I'm not sure how well I will do. If I think I'm going to do poorly (I might since I really haven't looked into what it's all about, despite me being a decently intelligent/sharp guy), then should I take it? Is there like a time length for how long I have to wait until I take it again? Truthfully, I thought about staying in Chicago for another year and taking a year of math and physics along with gathering research experience. I would already have the B.S. in Neuroscience, though. I'm still very, very unsure if any university will simply dismiss me for not taking physics, which is what other biology students do. Should I take it even though I might have three months to study? The campus has plenty of GRE books around. So, I don't think it will take me too long to study those.

Right. It's oil, isn't it? I'm not really sure anymore why the U.S. is in Afghanistan. Is the answer communism? Is it? I've heard a lot of reasons, including it being a religious war. Either way, you can still figure money into the whole ordeal. Why commit large amounts of energy unless you're going to see some economic benefit from it? You could say the Crusades were about religion, or you could say they were about economics. You could also twist the reasons for why the Civil War in America occurred. You'll find some oddballs who talk about things being about the railroads. Mother Teresa was an altruistic person... or was it that she really, really wanted to get into Heaven? I wonder what information history books for high schoolers will have 50 years from now. "Under the threat of Communism, America decided to go to war in Vietnam... Ironically, in the early part of the 21st century, many Americans began to embrace communist and socialist ideas. In an attempt for everyone to have a car, oil was needed. Thus, the Middle East was dominated by the U.S.. Under the guise of bringing light to the country, America used similar psychological brainwashing tactics that Hitler used during WWII to brainwash the future generations in to accepting American Imperialist ideas, such as the separation of church and state." amirite? Seems like if the Middle East is decently taken over, people who conduct foreign investments will see returns. The last time I heard about a special forces mission in the Middle East? It was about American Special Forces protecting oil fields. Maybe this is a ploy to gain friendship with India and/or China or economic domination in order to control supply to India/China.

Ok, inserting of the GFP gene at decent locations in the protein's gene enable the GFP gene to be used as a marker. If the genes for pyoverdin were inserted there, it's just f@#$ up the whole process and make the protein way larger than it needs to be, thus leading to a nonfunctional protein. What I'm reading, though, is that one thing that became of importance is that pyoverdin is phototoxic, unlike GFP.

Yeah, ok. I live in America, not the Middle East. If the enemy comes in America, the enemy will not be met with human rights by the general republic. It's nice to see a report like this. Regardless of the source the McChrystal chose, it was effective, thus showing that it's more about what an article says than who publishes. Being published in a subpar source and for people to discuss an article's important from a subpar source often says, "Hey, something unusual and extreme needs to be read." Hint: I think the Rolling Stones sucks. Maybe it's improved lately. I don't know. Sometimes... I think people should just let the Middle Easterners battle it out. Let them duke it out. If they were to get nukes, they wouldn't shoot them very far. It'd only be to the neighboring country, and that's it. Let them have their war, battle it out, and get it over with. It seems like we're not letting the Middle East have its great historical battle. It's like trying to stop two animals from hurting each other and supporting one side (it's a form of human selection). Otherwise, just nuke them. Nuke the hell out of both areas. Tell people to get the hell out and stay out. Put McDonald's and Wal*Marts all over the holy land. It's a losing battle as long as the religious zealots who want the land and find it important are still around.

Right. Ok, not a protein as such an item would be relevant to gene transcription (and the structure of both molecules is different, because one is composed of amino acids and the other isn't). But how about taking the operon that leads to the production of pyoverdin? That wouldn't work, because it couldn't be part of the protein, right? I'm guessing it shouldn't been seen as a competitor in any way to GFP? Either way, both glow. I think their glowiness is their most important aspect. It looks pretty.