|
On September 21 2016 18:51 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2016 18:21 brinepumps wrote:
When will some random mutation can be classified as evolution? what is the exact time.
example: there's a gen mutation on X bacteria. When can we assume that X bacteria has evolved, not mutated?
You can't really talk about evolution of a single cell in that way. Evolution is the process of selection of the fittest, and you kindof need a bunch of things for that. So if you have 10k cells, and one cell gains a mutation that provides an advantage, it'll start proliferating more than the other cells, and over time the population of vessels will be dominated by the offspring of the mutated cell, all with this new mutation. That's evolution, and I guess you could say that the population of cells has evolved. The hots lore where a single zerg can absorb some things from other people and transform, isn't really evolution in the genetic sense. Maybe the ability to transform like that was evolutionarily selected for, and there will be some evolution going on selecting zergs that absorb powerful traits. But it doesn't make sense to say that you eat someone's DNA, integrate it with your own, and call it evolution. Did that answer your question?
What? There was no natural selection in the creation of the Zerg. That was all the Xel'Naga (and later the Overmind). Also, you're mixing natural selection and evolution. The latter can exist without the former. For instance, in the case of breeding. It is clearly the case that a poodle is evolved from some ur-dogwolf (not quite sure what the common ancestor is), but the selection process was not natural: a bunch of humans got together and selected specific traits that they liked, ending up with a poodle.
Furthermore, we can "evolve" crops with genetic modification (e.g. golden rice). Here there isn't even any selective pressure, we just outright engineer the crop to have the properties we want. Whether you can call this evolution, rather than revolution, I don't know. In fact, the whole concept of evolution becomes a bit nebulous when seen separate from natural selection. However, it is a process by which species gradually (or abruptly?) adapt.
That said, I do agree that there is no point where you can say an organism "has evolved". Firstly because evolution does not take place within an organism, but between different generations of organisms within a species. When comparing different generations you could point to certain traits and say that they have evolved. The way evolution happens in nature is through genetic mutation, various forms of recombination (sexual, and otherwise), gene flow (mainly in bacteria and other single-celled organisms) and a number of epigenetic effects which we barely understand yet (these don't alter the genes directly, but alter how they are expressed within different cells).
|
Does anyone know why the Dubai-Melbourne flight does a fuel stop in Singapore, even though it is closer than Paris-Santiago, which is flown nonstop? Emirates even have plenty of 777-300ERs, hell they just waste one right here on the feeder flight from Warsaw... Is A380 that much more economical and the market not competitive enough to force direct flights, or is it a physical/geogeaphical problem?
|
I don't think its a geographical problem, I took a flight from Abu Dhabi (close to Dubai) to Melbourne in July and it didn't do any fuel stop. But now I'm curious as well 
|
On September 21 2016 20:40 opisska wrote:
Does anyone know why the Dubai-Melbourne flight does a fuel stop in Singapore, even though it is closer than Paris-Santiago, which is flown nonstop? Emirates even have plenty of 777-300ERs, hell they just waste one right here on the feeder flight from Warsaw... Is A380 that much more economical and the market not competitive enough to force direct flights, or is it a physical/geogeaphical problem?
You sure it's a fuel stop? I think I took that flight with the purpose of getting to Singapore. It's quite possible it's just a combined flight. They then take advantage of the stop to refuel, meaning they can leave Dubai with less fuel, ergo weight.
|
On September 21 2016 21:03 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2016 20:40 opisska wrote:
Does anyone know why the Dubai-Melbourne flight does a fuel stop in Singapore, even though it is closer than Paris-Santiago, which is flown nonstop? Emirates even have plenty of 777-300ERs, hell they just waste one right here on the feeder flight from Warsaw... Is A380 that much more economical and the market not competitive enough to force direct flights, or is it a physical/geogeaphical problem? You sure it's a fuel stop? I think I took that flight with the purpose of getting to Singapore. It's quite possible it's just a combined flight. They then take advantage of the stop to refuel, meaning they can leave Dubai with less fuel, ergo weight.
that would also explain how the return can be nonstop as i just found out still i dont get why they dont admit that it is two flights actually ...
|
On September 21 2016 20:40 opisska wrote:
Does anyone know why the Dubai-Melbourne flight does a fuel stop in Singapore, even though it is closer than Paris-Santiago, which is flown nonstop? Emirates even have plenty of 777-300ERs, hell they just waste one right here on the feeder flight from Warsaw... Is A380 that much more economical and the market not competitive enough to force direct flights, or is it a physical/geogeaphical problem?
Flight is sponsored by Petronas
|
On September 21 2016 18:21 brinepumps wrote:
When will some random mutation can be classified as evolution? what is the exact time.
example: there's a gen mutation on X bacteria. When can we assume that X bacteria has evolved, not mutated?
X bacteria alone doesn't evolve, it only mutates. Evolution is something that happens to a whole group in a species. Then when the non-mutated group dies because of selection, you can say the whole species evolved.
|
On September 20 2016 07:40 imBLIND wrote:
If someone says "I like your shirt", what else can I say besides "Thanks"?
Honestly, I always try to joke around about the shirt or whatever. Depends on the person how silly I'll be.
"I like you shirt..."
-"Me too. I think of it as a bold fashion statemnt." (When wearing a plain black t-shirt)
-"Really? I think it's kinda dull" (when wearing a really elaborate/flamboyant shirt)
-"Yeah. Fuck protoss" (when wearing SC gear)
-"People keep saying that" (when it's someone with a crush on me that I'm trying to wave off)
-"That's only because the body it's covering is rockin" (when it's someone who I want to string along)
-"me too. that's why I stole it" (general application)
|
^Damn these are so pretty good ones, respect
|
On September 21 2016 21:09 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2016 18:21 brinepumps wrote:
When will some random mutation can be classified as evolution? what is the exact time.
example: there's a gen mutation on X bacteria. When can we assume that X bacteria has evolved, not mutated?
X bacteria alone doesn't evolve, it only mutates. Evolution is something that happens to a whole group in a species. Then when the non-mutated group dies because of selection, you can say the whole species evolved.
I don't agree. A bacterium can perfectly propagate itself while acquiring a mutation in a certain gene making it antibiotic resistant. The next generation of that bacterium (after fission) will have evolved, because it will no longer be affected by the antiobiotic.
Evolution can be as broad or as narrow as you want it to be because it's just a nebulous term to be honest. It's basically genetic change to be able to survive and propagate in changed environment.
If that's one small point mutation to render a certain enzyme superactive or to shut it down (hello CFTR (heterozygotes better resistance to Cholera and other diarrhea inducing diseases) and sickle-cell (heterozygotes better resistance to Malaria)) or a change over time with implications on the physiological or anatomical level (beaks from the birds on Galapagos best example I guess), it can all b classified as evolution.
|
|
|
Why isn't the caucasian, asian or south-american community doing the same?
|
On September 22 2016 04:33 JimmiC wrote:
Kind of a serious stupid question.
Why isn't the black community ALSO putting pressure and negative focus on the bad part of their community that is helping to create and keep the negative stereotypes?
You need to spend more time around black people; there's plenty of inter-criticism.
|
On September 22 2016 04:33 JimmiC wrote:
Kind of a serious stupid question.
Why isn't the black community ALSO putting pressure and negative focus on the bad part of their community that is helping to create and keep the negative stereotypes?
There's a ton of pressure. Hang out with black people, go to black churches, listen to black speakers.
It's just that internal criticism is internal, so the rest of the world gets it less.
+ Show Spoiler +Honestly, there's a lot more internal criticism by blacks about black problems than whites about white problems.
|
On September 22 2016 05:03 Yoav wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2016 04:33 JimmiC wrote:
Kind of a serious stupid question.
Why isn't the black community ALSO putting pressure and negative focus on the bad part of their community that is helping to create and keep the negative stereotypes? There's a ton of pressure. Hang out with black people, go to black churches, listen to black speakers. It's just that internal criticism is internal, so the rest of the world gets it less. + Show Spoiler +Honestly, there's a lot more internal criticism by blacks about black problems than whites about white problems.
Regarding your spoiler, i think that that is because a lot of (white) people don't really see themselves as part of a "white" community, but they expect other people they superficially group together to feel like they are a "black", "muslim" or whatever community.
|
On September 22 2016 05:15 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2016 05:03 Yoav wrote:On September 22 2016 04:33 JimmiC wrote:
Kind of a serious stupid question.
Why isn't the black community ALSO putting pressure and negative focus on the bad part of their community that is helping to create and keep the negative stereotypes? There's a ton of pressure. Hang out with black people, go to black churches, listen to black speakers. It's just that internal criticism is internal, so the rest of the world gets it less. + Show Spoiler +Honestly, there's a lot more internal criticism by blacks about black problems than whites about white problems. Regarding your spoiler, i think that that is because a lot of (white) people don't really see themselves as part of a "white" community, but they expect other people they superficially group together to feel like they are a "black", "muslim" or whatever community.
Yeah and it's interesting when they do. There is a tendency among "blue tribe" whites (well-educated, liberal, cosmopolitan) to talk about the failings of "whites" and only mention the failings of "red tribe" whites (the deplorables). This of course ignores the ways in which blue tribe whites (who are an actual self-defined "in-group") fuck over minorities and women in their own, polite, well-educated ways.
|
|
|
On September 21 2016 20:23 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2016 18:51 Cascade wrote:On September 21 2016 18:21 brinepumps wrote:
When will some random mutation can be classified as evolution? what is the exact time.
example: there's a gen mutation on X bacteria. When can we assume that X bacteria has evolved, not mutated?
You can't really talk about evolution of a single cell in that way. Evolution is the process of selection of the fittest, and you kindof need a bunch of things for that. So if you have 10k cells, and one cell gains a mutation that provides an advantage, it'll start proliferating more than the other cells, and over time the population of vessels will be dominated by the offspring of the mutated cell, all with this new mutation. That's evolution, and I guess you could say that the population of cells has evolved. The hots lore where a single zerg can absorb some things from other people and transform, isn't really evolution in the genetic sense. Maybe the ability to transform like that was evolutionarily selected for, and there will be some evolution going on selecting zergs that absorb powerful traits. But it doesn't make sense to say that you eat someone's DNA, integrate it with your own, and call it evolution. Did that answer your question? What? There was no natural selection in the creation of the Zerg. That was all the Xel'Naga (and later the Overmind). Also, you're mixing natural selection and evolution. The latter can exist without the former. For instance, in the case of breeding. It is clearly the case that a poodle is evolved from some ur-dogwolf (not quite sure what the common ancestor is), but the selection process was not natural: a bunch of humans got together and selected specific traits that they liked, ending up with a poodle. Furthermore, we can "evolve" crops with genetic modification (e.g. golden rice). Here there isn't even any selective pressure, we just outright engineer the crop to have the properties we want. Whether you can call this evolution, rather than revolution, I don't know. In fact, the whole concept of evolution becomes a bit nebulous when seen separate from natural selection. However, it is a process by which species gradually (or abruptly?) adapt. That said, I do agree that there is no point where you can say an organism "has evolved". Firstly because evolution does not take place within an organism, but between different generations of organisms within a species. When comparing different generations you could point to certain traits and say that they have evolved. The way evolution happens in nature is through genetic mutation, various forms of recombination (sexual, and otherwise), gene flow (mainly in bacteria and other single-celled organisms) and a number of epigenetic effects which we barely understand yet (these don't alter the genes directly, but alter how they are expressed within different cells).
I was referring to the primal zerg, sorry that wasn't clear at all. I'm not knowledgeable in the lore, so i probably shouldn't have used that example.
The poodle did evolve from the wolf through natural selection. The natural selection changes with the introduction of the human into the system, making the poodle more fit in that environment.
Genetic engineering is not really evolution though. At most is an artificially introduced mutation that may prove more fit, and can take over the space over time through selective pressure, and at that point we can talk about evolution. As you say, evolution happens over generations.
On September 22 2016 01:59 Uldridge wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2016 21:09 OtherWorld wrote:On September 21 2016 18:21 brinepumps wrote:
When will some random mutation can be classified as evolution? what is the exact time.
example: there's a gen mutation on X bacteria. When can we assume that X bacteria has evolved, not mutated?
X bacteria alone doesn't evolve, it only mutates. Evolution is something that happens to a whole group in a species. Then when the non-mutated group dies because of selection, you can say the whole species evolved. I don't agree. A bacterium can perfectly propagate itself while acquiring a mutation in a certain gene making it antibiotic resistant. The next generation of that bacterium (after fission) will have evolved, because it will no longer be affected by the antiobiotic. Evolution can be as broad or as narrow as you want it to be because it's just a nebulous term to be honest. It's basically genetic change to be able to survive and propagate in changed environment. If that's one small point mutation to render a certain enzyme superactive or to shut it down (hello CFTR (heterozygotes better resistance to Cholera and other diarrhea inducing diseases) and sickle-cell (heterozygotes better resistance to Malaria)) or a change over time with implications on the physiological or anatomical level (beaks from the birds on Galapagos best example I guess), it can all b classified as evolution.
Wikipedia says evolution is over a population and over generations. So you can't really point to the mutation and say that that is evolution. It is part of evolution, but you still need the selection process over time where the mutated cell/whatever dominates the population.
But yes, we are arguing semantics. Not really productive, although the original question was very semantic in nature. I think we've addressed the question in sufficient detail and more by now.
|
On September 22 2016 06:50 JimmiC wrote:
I think the reason it is much more understates in the "blue" you describe is as a collective we would not allow that type of behavior. For sure it is underlying, and some feel how they feel. But I think it is a disservice to not point out that it is at least not welcomed and I would suggest getting smaller with each generation. That being said with Terrorism, and all the media coverage on racism it does it bring more top of mind and I guess it could make a comeback. I hope it continues to be forced into the "darkness" until hopefully someday it goes more or less away.
I'm not sure I follow this paragraph. Would you mind restating it?
|
What's the most impressive open-source project ever undertaken and completed?
(Trying to learn what kind of organization structures are utilized by the best for this collaborative stuff)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
