...or electrostatic for HelmholtzCould be a typing error of the brochure printer, accidently took the 8 for a 6.
What does this mean?
Sexual Reproduction, among many others, voraciously creates diversity, humans are exquisitely fitted to life on Earth and intimately connected to the rest of the primates ...The rest of your questions are covered by Human evolution.
Again, this is a deep and broad Science studied by tens of thousands worldwide and ... you think you've got the ... wrench-in-gears
hubris!
Last edited:
...or electrostatic for Helmholtz
Maybe a case of the wrong whistle-blower.
Can't help but paraphrase G.S. Patton, "Wars aren't won by dying for your community. They're won by getting the other poor bastard to die for his."
Indeed. That's how my clan gets the upper hand over your clan, and my genes prevail over yours.
Better yet, if I rape your women, my genes get an additional edge over yours.
May not look like it but still all easily explained by evolution theory.
Jan
Last edited:
What does this mean?
The rest of your questions are covered by Human evolution.
Again, this is a deep and broad Science studied by tens of thousands worldwide and ... you think you've got the ... wrench-in-gears
Not true. Without a family humans will do less well than nearly any another animal ( all surely except Kangaroo's etc ). You all need to do farming to understand this. The fact we have survived is proof we survived and not our excellence in survival skills. Nearly all humans are totally unsuited to real life before the age of 14 and I had no thought of reproduction when saying that. If you don't see that I am at a bit of a loss. What I do see is a colective denial. When I say to Colleen about food she doesn't want to know, she eats more meat than me. I never had a problem killing something I eat and I am very skilled at it. I don't enjoy it, I enjoy ebven less asking someone to do it for me. One must not cause pain, for a start it ruins the food. This disconnection runs through everything. I will tell you something very simple. If most here tried to live off of the land many would be dead before Christmas. Trust me it is not easy. I wouldn't give you any tools. You would do what cavemen did. I would take your clothes away, Do that in April so you have a chance. You would not be anywhere near other humans. The test would be fair and similar to 50 000 years ago. I 80% suspect I would fail this test even though I might be the best here to have a chance.
No wonder soceity is braking down when people have no REAL concept of family or farming. Humans have no chance without a familly. They are natures chocolate screwdrivers. Big brains and naughty ones at that. Brains do not make families. Families make families ( that's not touchy feely, it's the maths of it ). That's where I started. In the philosophical debate of Chicken or Egg it has to be Chicken. Where I did see a possibility was a mass mutation that can make a big cluster of humans. The mothering skills of many hairy primates was enough as they then had a family. A virus as the likely reason for a mass DNA change. This type of event happened many times. If you go back far enough the animal may not need much of a family. This to me is a reasonable possiliity. Next we have to debate why these babies were not killed? For me that would be where I don't trust the idea. This might say why viruses exist. Otherwise what it their function? As most people beleive life is a perpetual motion machine which self invents the virus would self invent itself. Why not if all other things commonly beleived are true?
All I intend is to get people to question evolution. It is a great sceince, but like an iceburg shows only the tip. Like Newton and Einstein. Newton was the bit we saw first.
The virus DNA thuing would show why there are not fossils of the progression. After the special flu had passed the mothers would have had the usual type of baby. As with humans brought up with Wolves ( they have existed outside of the stories of Rome ). Predudice of animals against unique types might have driven the mutants to seek there own type ? If so I suspect there were 100 's. That almost holds up. If in the next 20 years someone on TV proves this please remember I said it. To me what we have now is a Flat Earth theory.
The quote did this. most is mine . Nigel
hubris!
This paper reports the development of a low-power electrostatic microthruster based-on Helmholtz resonance. This fluidic resonance phenomenon is utilized to create high-speed jets of air for thrust generation. The microthruster contains a curved-electrode (~8.8 mum deep) and provides high force to, and large deflection of a vibrating membrane thus resulting in twice higher thrust performance than previously reported devices with a flat-electrode design. The out-of-plane curved electrode is formed on a silicon wafer through the controlled buckling of stressed thin films of oxide, poly silicon, and nitride. The fabricated device contains 25 microthrusters, has a footprint of 1.6 times1.6 times 0.1 cm3 , and weighs about 0.35 g. It operates using a 140 V and 70 kHz sinusoidal signal and produces: 1) thrust of 55.6 muN, 2) maximum air velocity of 1.2 m/s, and 3) average velocity of 1.0 m/s across the whole chip. The average power consumption of the 25 micro thruster array is 3.1 mW. The generated jet was visualized by pumping ethanol clouds into a vertical gas stream up to 12 cm.
The above is a quote.
Dejan it does come into it. Could be Walker did say it ? I know of Helholtz coils.
The above is a quote.
Dejan it does come into it. Could be Walker did say it ? I know of Helholtz coils.
Or any social animal. Ant, termite, hyena, elephant take your pick.
No it wouldn't. Social groups existed 50,000 years ago. try and come up with a fair test.
Evolution is a THEORY not a science. It is a theory that fits well with the available data.
Plenty of evidence of viral DNA in all animal DNA. but nothing to support your ideas. And the available data of the evolution of homo sapiens does not match either.
???
Social and family structures are ingrained in much of Nature and especially in mammals and primates
Social and family structures, environment manipulation, domestication, viruses, viral transmission of DNA, etc... are all part of Evolution and DNA. They only make sense and fall together into a big picture within Evolution.
???
There is no mysterious 'break with nature' or 'great survival' that desperately needs to be explained, let alone troublesome to the Theory.
Again, Primate Evolution has a large body of solid science that understands, explores, models, explains and utilizes the very issues you've touched on.
Incredulity or unfamiliarity isn't an argument.
From your last quote I can see that you have some political hobbyhorse ... from experience, that means I'm now done wasting my time.
Last edited:
Not at all. Family structures appeared when our predecessors changed from hunting/gathering to agriculture. Hunter/gatherers don't need families; what they had were tribe-like structures because it was advantageous to hunt in groups and share the spoils.
In fact, the change from groups to families with the change from hunting/gathering to agriculture is a perfect example of evolutionary adaptation.
Jan
Man has survived because as a species we have no mating season, our mating season all year long, i.e. whenever we can get some.
And the deck was heavily loaded against us. Early man had no special surrvival talents. not speed, not strength, no special tools to speak of, except one - he did think more than other animals. This is why man's existence depended on joining a pack (tribe) which animals do as well, and because man invented division of labor, which animals have only in the most rudimentary form (e.g. lion prides). More like man took an existing situation and evolved it further than any form of life.
And the deck was heavily loaded against us. Early man had no special surrvival talents. not speed, not strength, no special tools to speak of, except one - he did think more than other animals. This is why man's existence depended on joining a pack (tribe) which animals do as well, and because man invented division of labor, which animals have only in the most rudimentary form (e.g. lion prides). More like man took an existing situation and evolved it further than any form of life.
Probably because that's nature's way of checking our spreading around. We are already too many.
With other animals, you have mating seasons, with man you don't.
Well groups often share not only care for the total group's offspring but often also mates etc. With families I meant the entity consisting of man, women and offspring (and maybe also grand patents and/or grandchildren). That was my meaning of making the distinction.
But at any rate these changes were most probably gradually over many eons of time, and not 'today you have this, tomorrow we have that' affairs of course.
Jan
We're not disagreeing but just getting into the technical details.
No point in continuing.
The simple point is no eco-system or familly self invents. It needs some meachanism. The virus DNA idea is the only one I can think of. I know viruses can be used to change DNA. Any other idea is outside of my imagination.
Analogy. We have all the things we need for a fire. Will fire result ? Often not, it has to be made so. Without all you need it can not happen, that's for sure. Some mistake all you need for all you need to know.
It is remarkable that humans can survive. With health systems , rules and nice behaviour is can happen. It is miraculous. When a horse not so much so. Even a Polar Bear needs it's mother, it is nearly disaster for her to bring up a baby. If you said a baby Polar bear survives because it has it fur coat that is half of it. The real deal evolution saw to that. The bear possibly comes from a distantly related part of our family. The real deal evolvution is the iceburg tip ( no ice irony intended ). The rest of it all the complicated things that have to be right. My mind says in all new species it needs a mass transient mutation to take place. The Creationist rightly says the evidence for evolution is slender. This idea might resolve it. We we never see all of the times it happened when it failed.
Here is a thing to consider. If we took all the people with Williams Syndrome and breed them what would happen. Williams have very good hearing and some unfortunate traits. We would have a new human. It might just evolve out of it's problems. Williams unlike Downs can have high function when comparing the majority. The lack of facial diversity says perhaps not. Who is to know. Sheep are not facially diverse so it may not mean a thing. As someone said " why clone a sheep, all of them are clones ". BTW. Sheep eat ham sandwitches. It wasn't my fault, it grabbed it out of my hand when I was too busy talking. That was Dolly as we called her. That's worse than breaking Kosher. I am not very proud of that.
Family or tribe it needs something.
Analogy. We have all the things we need for a fire. Will fire result ? Often not, it has to be made so. Without all you need it can not happen, that's for sure. Some mistake all you need for all you need to know.
It is remarkable that humans can survive. With health systems , rules and nice behaviour is can happen. It is miraculous. When a horse not so much so. Even a Polar Bear needs it's mother, it is nearly disaster for her to bring up a baby. If you said a baby Polar bear survives because it has it fur coat that is half of it. The real deal evolution saw to that. The bear possibly comes from a distantly related part of our family. The real deal evolvution is the iceburg tip ( no ice irony intended ). The rest of it all the complicated things that have to be right. My mind says in all new species it needs a mass transient mutation to take place. The Creationist rightly says the evidence for evolution is slender. This idea might resolve it. We we never see all of the times it happened when it failed.
Here is a thing to consider. If we took all the people with Williams Syndrome and breed them what would happen. Williams have very good hearing and some unfortunate traits. We would have a new human. It might just evolve out of it's problems. Williams unlike Downs can have high function when comparing the majority. The lack of facial diversity says perhaps not. Who is to know. Sheep are not facially diverse so it may not mean a thing. As someone said " why clone a sheep, all of them are clones ". BTW. Sheep eat ham sandwitches. It wasn't my fault, it grabbed it out of my hand when I was too busy talking. That was Dolly as we called her. That's worse than breaking Kosher. I am not very proud of that.
Family or tribe it needs something.
Evolution. the hint is in the name. Slow changes over a LOOOOOOOOOONG period of time. Millions of years. social groups (aka families) exist in all Apes from whom we are descended. we had that before climate change in africa forced us out the trees and onto the savanna.
If the evidence for evolution is slender, how come we still have the remains of a tail, or an appendix, or a back which is clearly the wrong design for bipedalism? The evidence is everywhere, its just the simple minded cannot see it for what it is, or are scared to accept we are a monkey who got lucky.
Of course it does. Look around you with open eyes. EVERYTHING in Nature self-invents.
The point is random changes not only on the level of genes but also at a higher level. Say by accident a monkey drops a coconut on a rock and it splits the nut so he can get to the food/drink easier and/or more than the next guy. They get more offspring than the other guy who NEVER drops a coconut.
It may happen again, and again. Over a loooong time you get a population of monkeys that has the genetic makeup that gives them a tendency to drop coconuts. And a few 100 centuries later, you watch an Attenborough movie starring monkeys that routine smash coconuts on rocks to get food.
That, my friend, is evolution. Random changes that sometimes confer an advantage, sometimes not. All self-invented.
Jan
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.