arc

You are quite right Phi, http://www.giraffeconservation.org/giraffe_facts.php?pgid=39 "Regardless of their size, giraffe are not as destructive as elephants when feeding, indeed one scientist, Robyn Pellew who studied giraffe in the Serengeti, demonstrated that when giraffe are not too numerous, their impact can actually stimulate shoot production in Acacia species, which soon declined when the browsing stimulus was withdrawn. There are, however, also some natural plant protection methods at work which ensure over-browsing does not happen, for example carnivorous ants that are symbiotic with some Acacia species reduce the amount of time that giraffe can spend browsing on any one plant. On a positive mutual note, giraffe can actively benefit some of their food sources: Acacia seed consumption by giraffe favours seed dispersal into non-shaded habitats and enhances the potential for seed germination through the beneficial effects of its digestive processes. Giraffe are also thought to play a role in pollination." Specialization may be an Achilles heel in the evolutionary process. With an abundance of competition for both food and pollinators a match made in evolution would be beneficial in the short term. But off hand it would seem a high risk venture in the long run. Either species is now vulnerable from the others weaknesses and vulnerabilities whatever they may be, with the great panda immediately coming to mind. It stands out to me that the best fit for a mechanism to the development of these continually longer cervices in giraffes would be the competition at the lower levels of the available vegetation. http://www.giraffeconservation.org/giraffe_facts.php?pgid=51 The end of the Pliocene epoch (2.5-6 million years ago) saw a number of long necked giraffids evolve, but largely unsuccessfully with only 2 species surviving to this day. For a number of years there was discussion between some in the scientific community as to whether the West African and the Kordofan (sub)species of giraffe were in fact the same animal. DNA analysis can now confirm they are most certainly separate and indeed ongoing studies may well reveal they are actually separate ‘species’. In another case there was the suggestion that the Rothschild’s giraffe was in fact just a hybrid, but again genetic evidence has confirmed its place as an important (sub)species in its own right. A recent study of the Angolan giraffe in northern Namibia has suggested there is evidence that two neighbouring populations may well be separate (sub)species. And meanwhile the same science seems to have resolved a debate which sought to subdivide the South African giraffe into four separate (sub)species, and it is now widely accepted there is but one South African giraffe. There may have been a very competitive period where an abundance of lower elevation foragers drove this species and its relatives into the higher branches. Could this forcing have even been primarily amongst the related species as their necks lengthened beyond the range of the competitors?

Sure, after all those years of trying to outrun those damn ever lengthening necks you just finally give up, say uncle and accept your life as an umbrella for a bunch of noisy varmints.

OK, I know less then nothing about this stuff but - http://homeguides.sfgate.com/grow-agaricus-bisporus-24894.html "Cover the colonized compost with a uniform 1 1/2- to 2-inch layer, called casing to make a mushroom-growing medium. Make your casing with pasteurized sphagnum moss peat and add enough garden lime to raise its pH to 7.5." Looks like CharonY is correct about the acidity, and also the malt by the way.

Popcorn, those are human skulls. They have been reshaped by a tight binding applied when they were infants.

Well, I am no expert in this. But there doesn't appear to be any other contamination. I think the liquid is simply the water left over after the nutrients have been taken. I think all four examples being at the same stage is a good sign. Time will tell.

Isn't this normal? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycelium It is through the mycelium that a fungus absorbs nutrients from its environment. It does this in a two-stage process. First, the hyphae secrete enzymes onto or into the food source, which break down biological polymers into smaller units such as monomers. These monomers are then absorbed into the mycelium by facilitated diffusion and active transport.

Hi mooeypoo! Your choice. But then if that extinction event was complete and wiped the slate clean with all life gone, Including deep ocean. I would expect the repropagation of life could select a cartilage to vertebrae evolution as a simple bio-mechanical solution to the competition a deep ocean aquatic life form would be subjected to. I would think the evolution of vertebrae is as likely a choice of competition as is legs or wings.

No, I'm not so much arguing the odds of higher forms duplicating, but back in the beginning the fight was between whether heavy armor or speed and mobility would gain the advantage. Think about how during the first world war both tanks and aircraft appeared at the same time, either of them of little threat to the other. By the second WW the aircraft could destroy tanks at will. The vertebrates "took to the air" so to speak in the oceans, a strong lightweight frame worked well to attach muscles for fast movement. It was an obvious advantage looking back. And easily repeated by even us in our own life and death struggles for superiority.

It all comes down to specific needs. A larger or elongated body requires some type of support but it must allow movement for motivation. A cartilage member works well until long ribs are attached, they need a rigid attachment to function correctly in providing a strong protective body cavity, so to satisfy both the rigid and flexibility requirements individual vertebrae are a likely solution. Very early soft body ocean life would head in this direction rather easily I would think.

Ouch! you got ZAPPED!

It all comes down to probabilities. These are all locally found together and appear in similar condition giving strength to the idea they were not a far ranging or ancient race of alternative hominid origins. But rather a small, and not particularly old (as in prehistoric) group of very select individuals. It looks like their graves had "normal" humans buried amongst them. http://hiddenincatours.com/photo-sets/november-2012-tour-of-nazca-lines-and-paracas-elongated-skulls/ And looks to be a more successful example of common head binding. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_cranial_deformation Nothing unusual here folks, just move along!

It is possibly, and I believe likely, this is the result of a royal blood line conducting extreme selective inbreeding to the point of committing selective infanticide to eliminate undesirable traits and of coarse to promote the ones they want.

Don't click on the "Source: ADG (UK)" at the bottom of the page, you will likely receive a virus. "The samples were sent to the late Lloyd Pye, founder of the Starchild Project, who delivered the samples to a geneticist in Texas for DNA testing." That is possibly a good indication of the quality of the test results. Edit: spelling error.

I feel you may be exposing your children to a potentially stressful situation if they were to express their secular home schooled science during the classroom discussions of whatever alternative religious version the school teaches. I was fairly incapable at that age to remember instructions that my parents gave me about what to say to whom and why. The accidental sharing of what they feel is perfectly correct could leave them unavoidably embarrassed in front of an entire class if the instructor is less than civil about evolution. I think many here were exposed as young children to creation stories as a rather normal part of their early childhood, then much later understood through public school science class the fundamentals of evolutionary biology, and to no surprise show no negative consequences of this diverse education. There have been generations of scientist that grew up in this sort of early primary education that show no negative consequence. I don't think your kids will be brain washed, and I don't think you do either, otherwise you wouldn't send them there. I would be more concerned that my 5 and 6 year old feels liked and accepted by their classmates and not be placed in between two sides of a potentially volatile issue such as creation verses evolution. I doubt any of the other children would know any better but their parents are a completely different risk. They my have assumed this school would be a vacuum chamber to the outside world, can you predict what could go wrong and how bad it could be. You have plenty of time for your children to learn evolution, mine occurred because my parents subscribed to several scientifically oriented magazines that I gladly devoured by the time I was 8 or 9. Give your kids a few years to get comfortable in their school and they will satisfy their curiosity with the resources you provide.

I recall several years ago an interest in using natural hair to attract and remove oil from the surface of water bodies, as in oil industry accidents like BP had in the gulf at that time. As I remember the natural hair worked well but lacked a real large scale solution that didn't involve massive human involvement for collecting, transporting, and possessing the raw material into usable containment and removal devices. To create hair like structures directly into usable products in industrial quantities would probably solve this.

When larger predators appeared it was due to their adaptation to the size of the prey they predominately selected to hunt. The earliest known feline, Proailurus (“early cat”), a bobcat-sized creature that weighed about 20 pounds, roamed Eurasia and Africa more than 34 million years ago. While some adapted to hunt larger prey most varieties stayed small, probably to take advantage of the cover that the local flora provided in concealment from predators and prey.

"Suppose that a Time Machine worked in the same fashion as rewinding a tape" You have an idea that is more suited to a story line for a science fiction book or a movie. In that application you can write in as much techno-babel as is needed to carry the technology you create to accomplish the time travel of your idea. But here your idea must have a mechanism that is in complete agreement with the laws that the universe currently operates by. And I am quite sure it is Blu-ray.

But what other member can dig up a thread the same age as they are.

I agree, but I have a soft spot for the eccentrics, they have an inclined plane to lean into, sometimes it is what drives them. That need to prove the skeptics wrong. “All that was great in the past was ridiculed, condemned, combated, suppressed - only to emerge all the more powerfully, all the more triumphantly from the struggle. Let the future tell the truth and evaluate each one according to his work and accomplishments. The present is theirs, the future, for which I really worked, is mine.” Nikola Tesla And I like how his inventive mind worked; “Before I put a sketch on paper, the whole idea is worked out mentally. In my mind I change the construction, make improvements, and even operate the device. Without ever having drawn a sketch I can give the measurements of all parts to workmen, and when completed all these parts will fit, just as certainly as though I had made the actual drawings. It is immaterial to me whether I run my machine in my mind or test it in my shop. The inventions I have conceived in this way have always worked. In thirty years there has not been a single exception. My first electric motor, the vacuum wireless light, my turbine engine and many other devices have all been developed in exactly this way.” This is also a strong indicator of Aspergers .

Leonardo Da Vinci and Nikola Tesla - they were both mechanical geniuses, clever solutions abounded with these two. Tesla luckily lived at the dawn of the electric age and could make his mark there. What ideas would Da Vinci have had during that period of rapid change?

That is probably the nicest compliment you could give to someone here at SFN. And it is much to generous to bestow on someone such as myself. I am but a mere novice, a fan of science, amongst the real authentic scientists and research professionals that give to us so much of their time and knowledge. But I do appreciate the sentiment, I did get a little and you probably made several dozen people spit their Starbucks out all over their desk this morning. Way to go! High Five!

You should follow your instincts, which it looks like you are doing already. PS, Love your profile pic BTW.

You my friend are well on your way to the wonderful joys of careful observation of the natural world. Don't forget to take notes! And post here often.

Sorry I took so long to get back. Do you feel there was a clear difference in this series of experiments as compared to the original ones you did with the string? The 30+ cm (12") of wire seems to me as being too short to allow enough low resistance rotation, I would think it would need to be at least 4x that length to exhibit the movement. The chain Endy0816 recommended seems to be the best setup if you cannot obtain mono-filament nylon or swivels for your twisted string. With these most recent tests is there now enough reason to continue on to the mono-filament nylon or swivels? What would you expect will happen if you do continue?

yahya, I (and probably everyone else reading this) want you to do your experiment again. Would you please try it with any of the suggested alternatives; the mono-filament nylon, very thin copper wire, a very small chain like the kind used for jewelry or even a hair from a horse's tail. You need to do this as soon as possible and come back with the results. You need to verify this in as many ways possible. You should do this even before buying the swivels. This should help you to see if you are understanding this phenomena correctly. Take some video if you can.