CharonY

Textbooks are, unfortunately, dastardly expensive. I know some in engineering that got books from Chinese publishers (but English texts) of some books at a fraction of the price here. But there are also things like the Feynman lectures online for free.

Yes, the difference between Lennox and Miller is the concentration of sodium chloride. I.e. it is necessary for osmotic stability for some strains. Also selectivity of some antibiotics is stronger at low salts. Animal-derived products can contain contaminants that are a bit of an issue in biotechnological production of pharmaceutical or other high-purity products (especially casein was a bit of an issue, IIRC). For general lab cultivation this is less of an issue.

Well, technically religious freedom (of sorts) was less permissible for the longest time in the Western world. This has resulted in massive religious wars (although they were obviously also tied with political ambitions). Especially the conflicts following reformation were long and bloody, and I was always wondering whether that was the root for religious freedom in the West. The middle Eastern powers (and then, the Ottoman Empire) required a level of tolerance as trading was an important economic source. In the West, religious freedom was often seen as the freedom to any Christian flavor of religion, at least initially. And again, if change of mentality is the goal, it has to be due to societal changes. That, in turn requires different paths for different societies. Democracy in various European countries has developed differently from each other (and from the US) and even after respective constitutions have been created that e.g. state equality as a base premise, it took decades (or, in some cases centuries) before the society caught up with that ideal. It is very unrealistic to expect a whole society to adopt to certain values all in one go, and even in modern, Western societies archaic beliefs still exist (though are not enforceable by law). However, it is wrong to assume that the middle eastern societies are not undergoing change. Especially among educated parts of the population the mentality for equality is already there (you just need to talk to some female grad students from Saudi Arabia and their desire to return and make an impact on society). It will take a while (same as it took here) to pervade society. And there will be pushback from those in power that may see their interest threatened (same as here). A major issue are destabilizing elements in that region that make modernization very difficult, but one has to admire the people who still try despite all the real dangers.

That perspective is important IMO. Many aspects such as equality are a fixed item in Western countries. As such, it is easy to think of them as some core element that has been around forever. "Value" is sometimes understood as something inherent, immovable and unchanging. Yet, many of the values we grew up with, were radically different a mere one or two generations ago. Equality of gender, for example. Women's suffrage was instituted in many European countries after WWII, and in some cases quite some time after that. Also racial discrimination was for the longest time tolerated. In many ways, WWI and II as well as their aftermath have shaped Europe to a large degree and with it, the culture and values of the people. Heck, a number of European democracies were only formed after WWII although they were, in other aspects already modernized and developed. In that context it is important to remember that many middle Eastern countries as nations are incredibly young. Sure, Persia was an ancient civilization, but Iran with its current constitution only existed since the late 70s. Others have also formed sometime after WWII, and were in many ways less modernized than many of their European counterparts. And it is noteworthy that a number of predominantly Islamic countries have implemented constitutions that share similar values of democracy, sovereignty of the people and even secularism.

I assume with Western values you mean progressive, recent, modern values? It is not that Westerns values a few decades ago were very palatable to current society. My point being that Western values have changed massively in modern times, and these have come with a wide range political and socioeconomic shifts. It is unlikely that one can happen without the other. However, once things are in place, the changes can be quite rapid.

Could you elaborate what you mean precisely? I imagine that the opposing forces have intelligence in place, yet considering the size of the forces (estimates range between 30k to 200k) they will obviously not be a significant number. I do not see how that would somehow lead to a collapse, or what you mean with deprogramming...

I actually think that it was originally proposed by Richard Lynn sometime in the 80s. Lynn emphasized the need for higher IQ to adapt to harsh winters, whereas Rushton focused initially on r/K selection theory (with a slightly weird focus on genital size and IQ). However the explanations were never particularly strong and he had then moved on to other physiological correlations. Especially in the newer papers (relatively speaking) there are fewer attempts at evolutionary explanations. Instead the focus shifted at providing more correlation data between various physiological measures to draw differences between proposed races and, sometimes in a roundabout way, IQ. It should be added that the temperature/latitude IQ link has been found in various studies, but for reasons already mentioned adaptation seems to be an unlikely explanation. There are other factors, of course, with income being an important one. Heredity increases in well-off families, indicating more environmental constraints on scores for low-income people. There are other explanations trying to figure out whether UV-related vitamind D3 could, in some roundabout way influence IQ. So far, the existing data does not lead to strong conclusions, AFAIK. But then I have not been following this topic very closely.

In the reference I have given above the simple study suggests that. I.e. even if you look at very short time frames you can see stratification of IQ and other metrics that obviously cannot be explained by evolution.

Also for the longest time whoever ruled over China (which does include Mongols for quite some time). Essentially up to modern industrialization. That is generally dwarfed by the time mankind spent in Africa, however. So for the longest time the mightiest group would have been Africans by default. Of course the whole thing is just arbitrary and ultimately pointless.

One of the many issues, as has been noted before, is that skin color does not reflect well the genetic diversity found in human populations. A link between that and IQ would require something that influenced IQ as well as skin color (and a few other traits). One hypothesis that has proposed by Rushton and others is that after leaving Africa there were different selective pressures, specifically differences in temperature. It has been speculated that the colder winters, for some reasons, selected for IQ. whereas the associated decrease in UV exposure could explain bleaching of the skin. There were some studies that found indeed a correlation between temperature and IQ. However, there are are a few studies that show that the temperature-dependency is actually independent of race. A relatively recent study from Pesta and Poznasnki (Intelligence 2014 p271/274) showed that in the US temperature strongly predicts intelligence (as well as religiosity and crime, among others), even when adjusted for race. Due to the short time frame non-natives lived in the US, evolutionary factors are unlikely to play a role. Thus, assuming that the associations are not spurious, other environmental factors related to temperature are affecting scores.

The extraction method would depend on the type of the toxin, microcystin is a cycyclic heptapeptide, for example, whereas saxitoxin is a alkaloid. Often, liquid extraction is the simplest way for soil samples to extract compounds, but obviously each group would have a different preferred buffer. For microcystin I think I remember vaguely something like phosphate and EDTA, but I would check the lit looking for soil extraction of each class separately.

Aside from the gaming community issue, I still do not see any valid counterargument of why female CEOs or other high-value workers are underpaid. Or the other indication that female contributions are undervalued. The only argument so far is based on the video which does not compare equal jobs as SwansonT mentioned. Moreover various other data sources indicate that considering progression females have it harder, even when correcting for confounding factors. Again, the fact that a single statistic from 1950 is used as a counterargument to all hitherto collected data is a bit weak, to say the least. Also, claiming that people. who are updating this thread with new statistics are on autopilot, while rehashing the same argument (and data) for the last couple of pages or so, is at best, a clumsy diversion. Let us revisit an earlier argument, shall we? Physica claimed that women prefer to get into jobs where they can manipulate men and thus gain an advantage. It seemed to ridiculous of an argument so I kept away from that. But let me ask you this: if that is an important factor, why are so many more women in biology and chemistry as compared to physics and engineering? Is there a way that women use their female wiles to manipulate matter and organisms?

Oh yeah, these are great. Prefer Miele though. Supposedly the filters are better.

So meaning we should get rid of a significant part of the higher echelons of corporate organizations... (as they are enriched with people with psychopathic tendencies)? Using emotive labels and trying to make legislature based on that is a dangerous thing indeed.

I am not sure how useful that info is going to be as various types are used for wildly different applications. Just off the top of my head I got turbo pumps, roughing pumps, pumps for desiccators, vacuum dryers etc. Most of the expensive ones are from Edwards, but mostly for service/repair reasons (though they do make decent pumps with excellent reliability). Whether a price is good does not only depend on performance (which must match your application, obviously) but also how often it is used, whether you deal with corrosive gases, etc etc... The price for my pumps range from about 500 to 17k USD a piece.

And it is also fictional. There are quite a few bacteria capable of biodegradation, but by its very nature this process is relatively inefficient and slow.

Meiosis does not apply to mitochondria, they reproduce like bacteria (part of the evidence linking mitochondria to bacterial precursors).

Hmm good points. To be honest, I never thought about it that way. I guess in biology the term is used rarely and also loosely, more from the viewpoint of the synthesis (i.e. polymerization) than from the end product.

Many. Say plasticity. What you mean in context of neurobiology is different from genetics, for example. The means and consequences of physiological plasticity are different from genomic. Or say "mechanics". What it means is quite different on the quantum vs the macro-level. Language use is always context-driven. And as organisms have different modes of reproduction with different genetic consequences, it would not be very useful to put everything under the same umbrella. The need to establish context is especially important in complex systems, such as biological ones. With regard to pick and choose, in a way this is why science has different branches. Different methodologies are needed to answer different questions. In terms of divergence of species you can (and sometimes have to) use morphological markers as genetic material may not be available. But obviously it would be silly to even try that for unicellular organisms. Incidentally, this is why there is a need for specialization. It turns out nature is somewhat complicated.

Could you rephrase your question? I am not sure what precisely you mean. Scopus itself is not a publication per se, but a database to search for publications. You will need a subscription to the actual journal to read an article. Subscription costs (if that is what you are asking) are pretty much impossible to get as Scopus (as well as other databases such as web of science) have specific quotes for a given institution based on size, usage etc. Also often they do not allow these consts to be published.

All dendrimers that I can think of are polymers. Lipids could fit the bill, though.

The data is easy to find (including the Canadian Labour Market Activity Survey and Labour Force Survey) and has been analyzed from a number of sources including Baker and Drolet (Canadian Public Policy XXXVI, no. 4, 428-464.), Bourdarbat and Chernoff (Canadian Journal of Economics 46, no. 3, 1037-1065). The explained component based on productivity is taken from Baker and Drolet. Together with individual studies and surveys it paints the picture that on average female accomplishments are for some reasons undervalued relative to their male counterparts. Note that this is not a surprising finding per se, as similar patterns have also been observed in minority researchers. It should be noted that the pay gap overall in Canada is closing due to the increase of female post-secondary graduates. It is noteworthy to add that in Canada female graduates are actually now dominating the group of natural sciences and technology (though I do not have detailed data yet). As I have stated earlier, the gap is mostly present in high-income leadership roles in which women are underrepresented. In lower income (typically way below 100k) the gap is near non-existent. Partially, I presume due to unionized or other fixed wages. Forgot to add, 1950 sounds like an anomaly to me. All newer data indicate inequality when adjusted for marital status and just now closing for lower income wages. It is also a bit odd date to pick considering the labour market was in a massive post-war change at that point.

Also positive discrimination of women is a distraction at best as the data does not show it to be happening. On the other hand, wage differences on the high end scale of jobs is still very real and far from being debunked. In a Canadian survey of post-secondary graduates in Canada has shown that after correcting for productive characteristics (which includes marital status, experiences etc.) would explain at most 15% of the measured gap.

Hmm what would be an example of a non-polymeric macromolecule?

To the first point, if personal choices make you drop out of academia, I have no issues with that. Likely it adds to the attrition rate, but there are also fixes for it, including child-care and offering their partners children time. Yet the societal norms put the onus on child rearing more to the woman than to the man. Again, no issue if the woman chooses to take the time out, but quite often they feel that they have to step back, whereas their partners don't. This is part of the societal issue, which does not need to exist. Also, but why is it that you also see the imbalance in postdocs, which are competing for faculty positions and have foregone the choice of children? It has been reported that women consistently evaluated their relationship with their (predominantly male) supervisors worse than their male counterparts (Nettles MT, Millett CM. PhD. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2006). Especially in academic careers, with the high demand for networking, having a good mentor is critical to success. This appears to be a common theme. While men and women obtain postdoc positions at a similar rate (according to NSF data 2004, which I have handy), which is about 72 vs 70% in life sciences and a bit lower for females in other physical sciences (43 vs 48), it is common that women reported less satisfaction with their supervisor as males. One thing that was found in surveys (one was compiled by Davis and I cannot recall the full citation) female postdocs were more often than males asked to write grant proposals (for their mentor). If you are familiar with that it is a huge warning sign for exploitation. Overall, there is overwhelming data that females are not treated equally throughout academic careers, putting them into worse trajectory than their male peers. Incidentally that is also true for minority researchers and doubly true for minority female researchers. And while this not necessarily the only source for the imbalance, it is almost certainly a contributing factor. It is also important to understand that above certain academic attainment (essentially after getting a PhD). individual contributions are not sufficient to build a career, but having access to networks becomes increasingly important. This does not follow, unless mean that women are overall less capable? What is missing is that on the faculty level, being positioned well by your supervisor is crucial for success. In elite labs it was found that males tend to place males more often, which is a problem if the field is generally dominated by males. The issue really is that much of a career path in high-competition fields, especially in academia are not solely dependent on your own (technical) abilities, but requires strong interaction with peers and mentors. If women do not receive the same amount of support, it will lead to fewer women on top, which then presents to the youth a seemingly unchangeable biological , which in truth is mainly caused by existing power structures. Forgot about adding a bit to the gender payment. The gap is not staggering, when controlled for similar background and job. However it is worth noting that while the female pay is within 6% of the male payment, I have yet to find a single case where the reverse is true (i.e. females earning more than males). Especially in high-paying areas there is suddenly a gap again. For example, civil engineers (median salary 60,800) are over 80% male, but both genders get paid roughly equally. Chief executives on the other hand are similarly dominated by male, but here the difference, corrected for education, skills and experience favors males by 13%.