Mokele

More to do with the amount of land vs water in the northern vs southern hemispheres.

Meh, perhaps I'm wrong. Still, IMHO, this or that chemical in food is likely to be minimal in effect compared to simply re-routing blood flow and increase in parasympathetic nervous system output.

A mule has 63 chromosomes. It may, on rare occasions, produce a gamete with 62 (like a donkey) or 64 (like a horse). Those gametes combine with either horses or donkeys, the result will be another mule, but it's only got a 50/50 chance of being fertile. If it produces a 64 gamete, but mates with a donkey (62), you'll get a 63 offspring, a regular sterile mule. But if it produces a 64 gamete and mates with a horse (also 64), the offspring would have 64 chromosomes and be fully fertile. There can be gene flow between species due to hybrids. This has actually been observed in Darwin's finches, as well as other species. In fact, fertile hybrids aren't that uncommon.

Google scholar (go to google, click "more" on the top left, select "scholar") will let you search scientific articles. Many will require you to purchase access or to get them via a university, but some are free, and the abstracts of all are free. Just go there and search for "mutation rate". Sorry I can't be more help, I'm pretty much overwhelmed with teaching responsibilities at the moment.

We've had 3 threads on this within 2 months. Please search for existing threads before starting a new topic.

Look, this is clearly not working. You can't even understand our criticisms, and your work is either incomprehensible, crap, or both. You need to learn english, enough to hold a conversation, if you're going to participate here.

Yes, natural selection and many other processes reduce genetic diversity. But remember, there's a constantly influx of mutations, and it's *way* more than most people realize. On average, every human has 5 mutations that affect final protein structure, and many, many more that are neutral or that have unknown effects. In the face of such a huge mutation influx, methods to weed out undesirable mutations are absolutely necessary.

Here, we'll make it simple: Your work is garbage. Your science is poorly done. Your conclusions are not supported. Your data is ridiculous. You are a poor scientist. Clear?

Excellent find!

Random factoid picked up today from the Head of Gerontology at Brown: 19% of medical cases are for acute problems (injuries, sudden illness due to pathogen, etc.). The remaining 81% are chronic conditions which have reached the point of being unbearable. Many could have been managed more effectively and for lower cost (both to the patient and to society due to missed work time etc.) if caught earlier. I know there's been discussion on the difference between these in this thread, but I was stunned at just how much time, money, and effort goes into chronic care.

Honestly, I *am* a radical liberal, a member of the far-left. I frequent many sites catering to that crowd. And I can emphatically say that *nothing* coming out of the far left is even half as bad as the far right. When was the last time a liberal blew up a federal building was a truckload full of homemade explosives? Or shot a doctor? Or written a law based solely and completely on pure, unadulterated hatred?

Genes are neither bad nor good - there is no such thing as an inherently unfit gene unless it's purely lethal. Environment determines fitness. A shaggy coat on a dog is fit in Alaska, unfit in Alabama. By inventing cures and treatments, we've changed the selective landscape, rendering previously 'unfit' genes 'fit'.

Technically, the experiments failed to find the existence of it - it's not truly possible to definitively show something is non-existent (though manipulative experiments can show the failure of A to produce effect B).

There's an alternative to replacement, namely a sort of gradual evolution. It seems that, at least in the West, regulation has been increasing, usually in response to public demand (via elected officials). Why not simply let things evolve, trying stuff out along the way? If that winds up as something like socialism, fantastic. If it turns out capitalism really is best, also fine.

Bombus has been banned for willfully defying staff decisions and persistent fallacies.

Ok, this is officially over.

Actually, a lot of fish that school in huge numbers such as herring, shad, sardines, etc. are members of a single family, Clupeidae, which lack lateral lines. Other groups do use them, but in truly huge schools, they may be useless due to the sheer number of signals.

Such sillyness. Why would Obama need to resort to puny verbal tricks to sway the masses, when he can rely on his natural psychic powers. After all, like most US presidents, he is a lizardman from the constellation Draco.

I would agree, but the unwillingness to be investigated is what makes me hesitant. If he *really* was doing what any reasonable person thought was best, shouldn't he welcome an investigation that would vindicate him. I'd also point out that he's not merely breaking laws for the common good, he's using a method of information gathering so morally reprehensible that it's banned throughout the civilized world. That's a pretty hefty dose of 'the ends justify the means'.

::Looks at his iPod and Pandora:: What's "radio"?

No food has been found to elevate plasma melatonin.

You are aware that in both cases, you're talking about species with both exceptional vision and fine-tuned motor control, right? What makes you think they're doing anything more than responding to the fish/birds immediately around them?

A recently released study in Science shows that the Arctic is the warmest it's been in 2000+ years. Please note that the data only goes back that far, not that temperatures were just as warm back then. Link to the actual article, PM me if you want the full article.

So all mammals can be telepathic? Because all of those structures are present in every mammal. Never mind the fact that there's no evidence at all any of those phenomena even occur, much less are associated with those areas of the brain. Oh, and random crap on the internet is not evidence of anything.

There is no ether, and have you noticed that in order to detect brainwaves, we need to actually affix electrodes to the head? You have a better chance of telepathically detecting muscle activity, because muscle produce much, much more powerful signals. Yes, actually, it does. Even *if* we accept that there's some sort of signal radiation from the brain, it decreases to the cube of distance. And given that we cannot detect brainwaves without specialized instruments just on the outside of the skull, that means you'd have immense difficulty transmitting a thought even across a small room. There are no sensory receptors in the brain. None. For anything. No senses at all. That's why you can do brain surgery without putting a patient fully under - there's no pain receptors. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedIt's also worth asking why other animals don't have it? Why do they rely on pheremones and vision? We don't have anything they don't, and they've got plenty of senses we don't. To think that something as useful as telepathy has only cropped up in one species out of trillions is silly.