Evolucija

Naučna otkrića, edukacija, školstvo, univerziteti, fakulteti...
Post Reply
User avatar
Ateista
Posts: 51328
Joined: 18/01/2009 00:29
Location: rajvosa-x.com

#2626 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by Ateista »

gonič zmajeva wrote:religija kaže da su homo sapiensi savršena biča nastala na sliku boga koji danonočno bdije nad vama(nešto kao vrlo zgodan muškarac u kasnim tridesetima u službi za korisnike) :faraon: .i sve na zemlji je za njih.
evolucija kaže da ste nesavršena biča sa ogromnim egom i nova vrsta vas se srami. :angry:
i mogu reči da je evolucija u pravu!
Ovo je posebno zanimljivo, religije uvijek postavljaju kao da je sve na zemlji stvoreno za covjeka, da je priroda prilagodjena nama, a u stvari je potpuno obrnuto.

Evolucija kaze da se ziva bica prilagodjavaju vanjskim faktorima, pa tako i mi.
Nije priroda tu zbog nas i nije ona prilagodjena nama, mi smo postali ovakvi jer smo se prilagodili prirodi, to je jedna od osnovnih razlika zbog koje evolucija i religija ne idu zajedno.
gazda
Posts: 56
Joined: 29/07/2002 00:00

#2627 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by gazda »

Image

Zanimljiva knjiga, mada koliko su hvalili Hicensa vise sam ocekivao. Jako kvalitetan pogovor na kraju, a knjiga obiluje interesantnim zapazanjima i cinjenicama.

Ovdje mozete skinuti kompletnu knjigu, besplatno i legalno.
http://www.pescanik.net/arhiva/books/os ... hicens.pdf
User avatar
gonič zmajeva
Posts: 325
Joined: 11/06/2009 13:50
Location: Letovanić Hr.

#2628 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by gonič zmajeva »

religija je još jedan sistem za kontrolu mase.vrlo lako nam nameče tezu o "pametnoj"manjini koja se brine(sic)o narodu.
Ali dosta o najjeftinijoj drogi ajmo mi po skupom sportu iliti EVOLUCIJI.
User avatar
chengaba
Posts: 1870
Joined: 08/10/2003 00:00

#2629 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by chengaba »

gonič zmajeva wrote:religija kaže da su homo sapiensi savršena biča nastala na sliku boga koji danonočno bdije nad vama(nešto kao vrlo zgodan muškarac u kasnim tridesetima u službi za korisnike) :faraon: .i sve na zemlji je za njih.
evolucija kaže da ste nesavršena biča sa ogromnim egom i nova vrsta vas se srami. :angry:
i mogu reči da je evolucija u pravu!
Ovo je ekšli odlicno objasnjenje... :D :D :thumbup:
User avatar
ljubav_aha
Posts: 15082
Joined: 03/04/2008 19:25
Location: TURKISH COFFEEBATH

#2630 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by ljubav_aha »

halo :lol: otovrite novu temu evolucija na pdf religija :mrgreen:
User avatar
gonič zmajeva
Posts: 325
Joined: 11/06/2009 13:50
Location: Letovanić Hr.

#2631 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by gonič zmajeva »

ljubav_aha wrote:halo :lol: otovrite novu temu evolucija na pdf religija :mrgreen:
prijavit ču te za vrijeđanje i duševne boli provokatoru :angry: :x :angry:
ad-le
Posts: 3
Joined: 14/02/2010 14:35

#2632 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by ad-le »

JThomas wrote:kako je bolan svijest nezavisna od biološke osnove? :-)

šta se dešava kad neko dobije težak udarac u glavu, pa oslijepi ili poludi, ili bokseri i parkinsonova bolest, ili milion drugih mentalnih bolesti koje imaju opipljivu biološku osnovu?
Ne dobija se Parkinsonova bolest samo od udaraca u glavu..
User avatar
chengaba
Posts: 1870
Joined: 08/10/2003 00:00

#2633 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by chengaba »

Rezultati studije, koja je objavljena 2006. godine, pokazuju odgovor na pitanje: "Ljudska bića kakve poznajemo danas, su se razvila iz ranijih vrsta životinja."
Mogući odgovori na pitanja su tačno, nisam siguran i netačno.

Image
ja71
Posts: 5614
Joined: 31/03/2006 14:45

#2634 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by ja71 »

@chengaba
i kako interpretisati rezultate studije ?
User avatar
Ateista
Posts: 51328
Joined: 18/01/2009 00:29
Location: rajvosa-x.com

#2635 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by Ateista »

ja71 wrote:@chengaba
i kako interpretisati rezultate studije ?
Vidi se u kojim drzavama je najslabiji a u kojima najjaci uticaj religije, vrlo jednostavno. :D
sabanss
Posts: 4768
Joined: 13/08/2006 11:20

#2636 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by sabanss »

Ateista wrote:
ja71 wrote:@chengaba
i kako interpretisati rezultate studije ?
Vidi se u kojim drzavama je najslabiji a u kojima najjaci uticaj religije, vrlo jednostavno. :D
Jel' to ima veze sa nekim drugim parametrima. Vidim da USA kao tehnoloski superiorna zemlja svim ostalim ima jako malo vjere u teoriju evolucije. :D
User avatar
idealnaM
Posts: 676
Joined: 07/07/2009 01:16
Location: zaKavdak

#2637 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by idealnaM »

Ateista wrote:
ja71 wrote:@chengaba
i kako interpretisati rezultate studije ?
Vidi se u kojim drzavama je najslabiji a u kojima najjaci uticaj religije, vrlo jednostavno. :D
A isto tako, vidi se gdje su ljudi poprilično progutali teoriju evolucije :oops:
User avatar
madner
Posts: 57524
Joined: 09/08/2004 16:35

#2638 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by madner »

IdealnaG jos jednom napada :D
User avatar
idealnaM
Posts: 676
Joined: 07/07/2009 01:16
Location: zaKavdak

#2639 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by idealnaM »

madner wrote:IdealnaG jos jednom napada :D
:skoljka: japerk :run:
ja71
Posts: 5614
Joined: 31/03/2006 14:45

#2640 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by ja71 »

i po meni ona skala nista vise ne govori osim ko vodi glavnu rijec pri propagandi.
interesantno bi bilo
one u lijevom dijelu dijagrama pitati koliko stvarno razumiju teoriju evolucije
ili one u desnom dijelu koliko slijede pravila svoje religije
GaRGa
Posts: 2830
Joined: 25/02/2009 15:00

#2641 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by GaRGa »

NIN wrote:Image
Kalcit, jedna od kolijevki života.

Prije 4 milijarde godina kristali poput kalcita započeli su prvi korak u prijelazu iz kemijske u biološku prirodu, prvi korak u stvaranju života. Za prijelaz iz pred-biološkog svijeta od prije 4 milijarde godina do svijeta kakav danas poznajemo bilo je potrebno da se aminokiseline - građevni blokovi proteina u svim živim sustavima - povežu u lančane molekule.

Inače, u prirodi se pojavljuje stotinjak amino kiselina, ali ih se pri sintezi proteina koristi samo njih 20, jednakih u svih živih organizama, od biljaka, preko životinja, do ljudi. Aminokiseline sakupljene u dugačke lance, baš poput bisera koji se nižu na uzici, čine proteinske molekule. Redoslijed aminokiselina u proteinima zapisan je redoslijedom slova genetičkog teksta (A, T, G, C) u genima.

Čini se da su Robert Hazen i Timothy Filley iz No content !!! i Glenn Goodfriend s Geophysical Laboratory s Carnegie Institution of Washington otkrili ključan korak u tom procesu prijelaza - korak koji je bio predmetom istraživanja više od pola stoljeća. Njihov je rad objavljen u
Molekularna struktura svih aminokiselina, osim jedne, asimetrični je razmještaj okupljen oko ugljika. Takav razmještaj podrazumijeva postojanje dva odraza oblika svake aminokiseline, a oblici su označeni kao lijevi (L) i desni (D). Kemijski ustroj svih živih sustava razlikuje se prema selektivnoj uporabi tih (L) i (D) molekula. S druge strane, nebiološki procesi najčešće ne razlikuju L i D varijante.

Da bi se pojavio prijelaz između kemijskog i biološkog područja, bio je nužan nekakav prirodni proces koji je trebao odvojiti i ponovno zasebno skupiti L i D aminokiseline.

Hazen je sa suradnicima proveo jednostavan eksperiment. Uronili su kristal uobičajenog minerala kalcita, koji oblikuje kamen vapnenac i čvršće dijelove mnogih morskih životinja u razrijeđenu otopinu kiseline razdvojenih aminokiselina i otkrili da se najvećim dijelom L i D molekule okupljaju na različitim dijelovima kristala kalcita.
Geophysical Laboratory s Carnegie Institution of Washington
Većina minerala su centrični, naime, njihove strukture nisu razdijeljene po stranama. Ipak, neki kristali pokazuju parove kristalnih površina koje imaju međusobni odnos odraza. Jedan takav mineral je kalcit i uobičajen je danas baš kao što je bio i tijekom azoičkog razdoblja otprilike prije 4 milijarde godina kada se pojavio život.

Studija navodi na zaključak po kojemu su se miješane L i D aminokiseline u vrijeme nastanka života odabirale i nanovo zasebno skupljale uz pomoć postojećih površina minerala.
(preuzeto sa iskon.hr)

Pa da otpocnemo.........
[/b]

Posto si ti proevolucionista da te pitam nesto

zasto nema evolucije medju majmunima u zadnjih 300 hiljada godina ? i zasto nije bilo napredka kod humanoida do prije 6 hiljada godina ?
User avatar
chengaba
Posts: 1870
Joined: 08/10/2003 00:00

#2642 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by chengaba »

GaRGa wrote: Posto si ti proevolucionista da te pitam nesto

zasto nema evolucije medju majmunima u zadnjih 300 hiljada godina ? i zasto nije bilo napredka kod humanoida do prije 6 hiljada godina ?
Prije nego što ti NIN odgovori, odakle tebi informacije da nema "napretka" (ovo je prilično pogrešan termin, ali da se sad dodatno ne zbunjujemo).
Bušman
Posts: 2146
Joined: 08/04/2008 08:48

#2643 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by Bušman »

Ova pitanja vezana za evoluciju "humanoida" (valjda misle na covjeka) je samo pokazatelj koliko su protivnici evolucije ograniceni ljudi. Je li to covjek jedini mjerodavan pokazatelj da je evolucija tacna teorija ili ne?
Pa ljudi moji, bakterije su u posljednjih 50 godina toliko evoluirale da velika vecina antibiotika im ne moze nista. Virusi svaki cas evoluiraju. Uostalom, sta mislite sto svaki put morate odlezati gripu? To se niste pitali...

Evolucija ima svoju dinamiku (cak ima i zgodan matematicki opis evolucije kao algoritma optimizacije, oni koji se bave time, znaju dobro o cemu je rijec :) ). Evolucija ima svoje restrikcije i uslove u kojima se odvija brze ili sporije. Evolucija covjeka je mozda usporila, ali zato neki drugi organizmi brze evoluiraju.
ja71
Posts: 5614
Joined: 31/03/2006 14:45

#2644 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by ja71 »

Bušman wrote:...Evolucija covjeka je mozda usporila, ...
odlicno !
a zasto je to tako ?
Zato sto nema prirodne selekcije, covjek je sve manje ovisan od prirode.
svako je u stanju svoje gene prenijeti dalje.

ali posto sam laik nek me isprave, ovdje ima kompetentnijih ljudi.
User avatar
NIN
Posts: 6187
Joined: 15/02/2006 20:18
Location: Via Lactea, Orion Arm

#2645 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by NIN »

Zasto ljudu nemaju krzno

From the February 2010 Scientific American Magazine | 104 comments
The Naked Truth: Why Humans Have No Fur

Recent findings lay bare the origins of human hairlessness—and hint that naked skin was a key factor in the emergence of other human traits
By Nina G. Jablonski

Image

Key Concepts
- Humans are the only primate species that has mostly naked skin.
- Loss of fur was an adaptation to changing environmental conditions that forced our ancestors to travel longer distances for food and water.
- Analyses of fossils and genes hint at when this transformation occurred.
- The evolution of hairlessness helped to set the stage for the emergence of large brains and symbolic thought.

Hairy Situations
To understand why our ancestors lost their body hair, we must first consider why other species have coats in the first place. Hair is a type of body covering that is unique to mammals. Indeed, it is a defining characteristic of the class: all mammals possess at least some hair, and most of them have it in abundance. It provides insulation and protection against abrasion, moisture, damaging rays of sunlight, and potentially harmful parasites and microbes. It also works as camouflage to confuse predators, and its distinctive patterns allow members of the same species to recognize one another. Furthermore, mammals can use their fur in social displays to indicate aggression or agitation: when a dog “raises its hackles” by involuntarily elevating the hairs on its neck and back, it is sending a clear signal to challengers to stay away.

Yet even though fur serves these many important purposes, a number of mammal lineages have evolved hair that is so sparse and fine as to serve no function. Many of these creatures live underground or dwell exclusively in the water. In subterranean mammals, such as the naked mole rat, hairlessness evolved as a response to living in large underground colonies, where the benefits of hair are superfluous because the animals cannot see one another in the dark and because their social structure is such that they simply huddle together for warmth. In marine mammals that never venture ashore, such as whales, naked skin facilitates long-distance swimming and diving by reducing drag on the skin’s surface. To compensate for the lack of external insulation, these animals have blubber under the skin. In contrast, semiaquatic mammals—otters, for example—have dense, waterproof fur that traps air to provide positive buoyancy, thus decreasing the effort needed to float. This fur also protects their skin on land.

The largest terrestrial mammals—namely, elephants, rhinoceroses and hippopotamuses—also evolved naked skin because they are at constant risk of overheating. The larger an animal is, the less surface area it has relative to overall body mass and the harder it is for the creature to rid its body of excess heat.
...
Sweating It Out
Keeping cool is a big problem for many mammals, not just the giant ones, especially when they live in hot places and generate abundant heat from prolonged walking or running. These animals must carefully regulate their core body temperature because their tissues and organs, specifically the brain, can become damaged by overheating.
...
Humans, in addition to lacking fur, possess an extraordinary number of eccrine glands—between two million and five million—that can produce up to 12 liters of thin, watery sweat a day. Eccrine glands do not cluster near hair follicles; instead they reside relatively close to the surface of the skin and discharge sweat through klix pores. This combination of naked skin and watery sweat that sits directly atop it rather than collecting in the fur allows humans to eliminate excess heat very efficiently. In fact, according to a 2007 paper in Sports Medicine by Daniel E. Lieberman of Harvard University and Dennis M. Bramble of the University of Utah, our cooling system is so superior that in a marathon on a hot day, a human could outcompete a horse.
...
By using fossils of animals and plants to reconstruct ancient ecological conditions, scientists have determined that starting around three million years ago the earth entered into a phase of global cooling that had a drying effect in East and Central Africa, where human ancestors lived. With this decline in regular rainfall, the wooded environments favored by early hominids gave way to open savanna grasslands, and the foods that our ancestors the australopithecines subsisted on—fruits, leaves, tubers and seeds—became scarcer, more patchily distributed and subject to seasonal availability, as did permanent sources of freshwater. In response to this dwindling of resources, our forebears would have had to abandon their relatively leisurely foraging habits for a much more consistently active way of life just to stay hydrated and obtain enough calories, traveling ever longer distances in search of water and edible plant foods.
...
It is around this time that hominids also began incorporating meat into their diet, as revealed by the appearance of stone tools and butchered animal bones in the archaeological record around 2.6 million years ago. Animal foods are considerably richer in calories than are plant foods, but they are rarer on the landscape. Carnivorous animals therefore need to range farther and wider than their herbivorous counterparts to procure a sufficient amount of food. Prey animals are also moving targets, save for the occasional carcass, which means predators must expend that much more energy to obtain their meal. In the case of human hunters and scavengers, natural selection morphed the apelike proportions of the australopithecines, who still spent some time in the trees, into a long-legged body built for sustained striding and running. (This modern form also no doubt helped our ancestors avoid becoming dinner themselves when out in the open.)
...
When did this metamorphosis occur? Although the human fossil record does not preserve skin, researchers do have a rough idea of when our forebears began engaging in modern patterns of movement. Studies conducted independently by Lieberman and Christopher Ruff of Johns Hopkins University have shown that by about 1.6 million years ago an early member of our genus called Homo ergaster had evolved essentially modern body proportions, which would have permitted prolonged walking and running. Moreover, details of the joint surfaces of the ankle, knee and hip make clear that these hominids actually exerted themselves in this way. Thus, according to the fossil evidence, the transition to naked skin and an eccrine-based sweating system must have been well under way by 1.6 million years ago to offset the greater heat loads that accompanied our predecessors’ newly strenuous way of life.

Another clue to when hominids evolved naked skin has come from investigations into the genetics of skin color. In an ingenious study published in 2004, Alan R. Rogers of the University of Utah and his colleagues examined sequences of the human MC1R gene, which is among the genes responsible for producing skin pigmentation. The team showed that a specific gene variant always found in Africans with dark pigmentation originated as many as 1.2 million years ago. Early human ancestors are believed to have had pinkish skin covered with black fur, much as chimpanzees do, so the evolution of permanently dark skin was presumably a requisite evolutionary follow-up to the loss of our sun-shielding body hair. Rogers’s estimate thus provides a minimum age for the dawn of nakedness.
...
Comparison of the human and chimp genomes reveals that one of the most significant differences between chimp DNA and our own lies in the genes that code for proteins that control properties of the skin. The human versions of some of those genes encode proteins that help to make our skin particularly waterproof and scuff-resistant—critical properties, given the absence of protective fur. This finding implies that the advent of those gene variants contributed to the origin of nakedness by mitigating its consequences.
...
Not Entirely Nude
However it was that we became naked apes, evolution did leave a few body parts covered. Any explanation of why humans lost their fur therefore must also account for why we retain it in some places. Hair in the armpits and groin probably serves both to propagate pheromones (chemicals that serve to elicit a behavioral response from other individuals) and to help keep these areas lubricated during locomotion. As for hair on the head, it was most likely retained to help shield against excess heat on the top of the head. That notion may sound paradoxical, but having dense hair on the head creates a barrier layer of air between the sweating scalp and the hot surface of the hair. Thus, on a hot, sunny day the hair absorbs the heat while the barrier layer of air remains cooler, allowing sweat on the scalp to evaporate into that layer of air. Tightly curled hair provides the optimum head covering in this regard, because it increases the thickness of the space between the surface of the hair and the scalp, allowing air to blow through. Much remains to be discovered about the evolution of human head hair, but it is possible that tightly curled hair was the original condition in modern humans and that other hair types evolved as humans dispersed out of tropical Africa.
...

http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... fur&page=4


Pozdrav...
GaRGa
Posts: 2830
Joined: 25/02/2009 15:00

#2646 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by GaRGa »

chengaba wrote:
GaRGa wrote: Posto si ti proevolucionista da te pitam nesto

zasto nema evolucije medju majmunima u zadnjih 300 hiljada godina ? i zasto nije bilo napredka kod humanoida do prije 6 hiljada godina ?
Prije nego što ti NIN odgovori, odakle tebi informacije da nema "napretka" (ovo je prilično pogrešan termin, ali da se sad dodatno ne zbunjujemo).

Pa ako su ljudi nastali od majmuna sto onda jos uvijek imam majmune u neizmjenjenon obliku ? kad nesto nastance iz necega drugog taj izvorni oblik nestane, bar ja tako vidim evoluciju, neznam mozda je doslo do diobe ko kod ameba :))))
GaRGa
Posts: 2830
Joined: 25/02/2009 15:00

#2647 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by GaRGa »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_World_monkey

majmun od prije 35 miliona godina!!! meni isti ko danasnji...
User avatar
Ateista
Posts: 51328
Joined: 18/01/2009 00:29
Location: rajvosa-x.com

#2648 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by Ateista »

GaRGa wrote:
chengaba wrote:
GaRGa wrote: Posto si ti proevolucionista da te pitam nesto

zasto nema evolucije medju majmunima u zadnjih 300 hiljada godina ? i zasto nije bilo napredka kod humanoida do prije 6 hiljada godina ?
Prije nego što ti NIN odgovori, odakle tebi informacije da nema "napretka" (ovo je prilično pogrešan termin, ali da se sad dodatno ne zbunjujemo).

Pa ako su ljudi nastali od majmuna sto onda jos uvijek imam majmune u neizmjenjenon obliku ? kad nesto nastance iz necega drugog taj izvorni oblik nestane, bar ja tako vidim evoluciju, neznam mozda je doslo do diobe ko kod ameba :))))
Grijesis, ljudi nisu nastali od majmuna nego su sa majmunima imali zajednicke pretke. :D

U nekoj fazi evolucije su se razdvojili i nastalo je vise razlicitih vrsta, medju njima su i neandertalci za koje se nekad mislilo da su covjekovi preci ali se najnovijim istrazivanjima ispostavilo da nisu vec da su se isto tako u jednoj fazi razdvojili.
ja71
Posts: 5614
Joined: 31/03/2006 14:45

#2649 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by ja71 »

GaRGa wrote: ...kad nesto nastance iz necega drugog taj izvorni oblik nestane...
zasto ?
User avatar
chengaba
Posts: 1870
Joined: 08/10/2003 00:00

#2650 Re: EVOLUCIJA

Post by chengaba »

GaRGa wrote:majmun od prije 35 miliona godina!!! meni isti ko danasnji...
E drug moj, kad bi samo tako taksonomija funkcionisala... :skoljka:
Post Reply