Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Biology
BiologyBotanyMicrobiologyEntomologyEvolutionPaleontology
Chemistry
General ChemistryAnalytical ChemistryElectrochemistryOrganic Synthesis
Earth Science
GeologyMineralogyOceanographyMeteorologyEarthquakes
Physics
General PhysicsResearchRelativityParticle PhysicsElectromagnetismFusionOpticsAcousticsNew Theories

Natural Science Forum / Biology / Evolution / July 2008



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

ThreadLast Post  Replies
Sympatric Speciation or Speciation without Changes in Genes21 Jul 2008 06:41 GMT2
Sympatric Speciation or Speciation without Changes in Genes
For a long time, sympatric speciation has been considered as an
unlikely mode of speciation because, paradigmatically, the process of
speciation has been considered to require accumulation of differences
Panspermia Catch 2216 Jul 2008 21:32 GMT6
On the one hand, a planet needs enough gravity to hold
in the necessary gases to have the atmosphere that
leads to life.
On the other, 'there is probably not enough energy in
Rewriting Darwin: The new non-genetic inheritance16 Jul 2008 21:32 GMT1
Rewriting Darwin: The new non-genetic inheritance - From New Scientist
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.romanian/msg/ccf8322969990515
--
__________
David Deamer Response to my E-mail Comment15 Jul 2008 21:03 GMT1
I sent the following e-mail to David Deamer one of the
most notable people in the origin of life study.
Surprisingly he sent back his comments within an hour.
He agreed with some, disagreed with some and at the
Question about the Shannon "entropy" of genomes15 Jul 2008 21:03 GMT2
Using Claude Shannon's formulas for measuring the redundancy of symbol
tokens in message strings , and given a large enough text to work with, it
is possible to identify the language of a text simply from the statistical
analysis of token use alone, since all languages have ...
Why no new species of man?11 Jul 2008 17:34 GMT4
A few hundred thousand years ago,  the world population was very smal
yet we had several species of man. In the past 1000 years the world
population has grown orders of magnitude larger, yet how come no new
species have evolved?
Coincidence or Clue10 Jul 2008 20:50 GMT2
The major component of life is the nucleotides,
purines (A,G) and pyrimidines(C,T,U). Both strongly
absorb UV light. When life began the earth was
bombarded with unfiltered UV light from the sun.
[Fwd: Re: [evol-psych] The Unnerving World Of Psychopaths]]10 Jul 2008 20:50 GMT1
Mark Hubey wrote:

> Robert Karl Stonjek wrote:
Chaperones and Protein Folding10 Jul 2008 20:50 GMT1
Just read an interesting article on chaperones in the current Sci.Am.  Their
central function remains that of promoting and enabling the proper 3-D
configuration of amino acid chains into finished protein, but many
additional functions involving intricate disassembly and ...
Paper: Origins of life: How leaky were primitive cells?08 Jul 2008 06:52 GMT1
Nature 454, 37-38 (3 July 2008) | doi:10.1038/454037a; Published online 2
July 2008
Origins of life: How leaky were primitive cells?
David W. Deamer
Evolution sees!08 Jul 2008 06:52 GMT1
A recent essay:
  http://alife.co.uk/essays/evolution_sees/
This essay deals with the supposed blindness of evolution.
To quote from its ending:
Is this evidence of altruism in dogs?07 Jul 2008 06:45 GMT5
A friend has told me he witnessed the following in a semi-rural suburb
north of Athens.
There are many stray dogs in the area. A woman in a nearby house was
putting food out for them regularly and a group of dogs had taken to
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.