I can’t believe the ‘aints won. Oh wait, I totally can because I don’t watch sports. It’s a hockey team, right? Soccer? Eh
(0)The atmosphere isn’t stuffy or fancy, but all the food is really good. The key to good Italian food isn’t… http://www.urbanspoon.com/x/mlc
(0)“New research rejects 80-year “Primordial Soup” theory of life’s origin”. Earth’s chemistry more important. http://bit.ly/bDpcNc
(0)By what deranged stretch of the imagination is a hamburger with bacon on it a grilled cheese?
(0)BYU has a bio dept. now? Great to see schools choosing academic integrity over pleasing their sponsors’ beliefs. (Online BIO300 class?)
(0)I think advertisers are increasingly realizing that it pays to let people know what they catch of something is or give a reason why they have an incentive to act in your interest. I just saw some cash advance commercial (don’t want to name company to help them advertise) and the guy says “it’s a little expensive, but there’s no credit check and it’s cheaper than XXX.” This is somewhat related to the comment I made in my blog about Avatar – without seeing any major negative aspects of the Navi’s culture, I’m not left thinking “oh, how Idyllic” but rather “oh, there’s something evil lurking.”
Lately, I’m increasingly thinking, especially after reading this article, that evolutionary computing would benefit greatly from using a more bacterial type of evolution, where genes are shared between often unrelated organisms, rather than brute inheritance. Another way of looking at it, is it might be good to deal with the complexities of subroutine sharing (which functional programming would make easier) than the complexities of sexual reproduction which make my eyes glaze over to read the solutions offered for. Maybe I’m just not clever enough (my earlier post on genetic programming had a little ruby script and it only uses asexual reproduction).
I am skeptical of the article’s claim that the shared genetic code of all organisms must mean that genes were shared between organisms like bacterium do today. Firstly, bacterium don’t all share some common genes due to the passing of genes between species as it is. Secondly, clade evolution – where clades that are just better at evolving edge out others over time could be sufficient explanation. Surely DNA-based life had immense advantages over life with less fault-tolerant code. Just the same, the article makes a good point that biologists are, being human macro-centric – they focus on multi-cellular organisms even though most of the biomass, even more of the variety, along with the vast, vast majority of the history of life on this planet, is prokaryotic.
Rachel Ray – a woman who copes with her inability to get pregnant by eating like she is
(0)Defensive Omnivore Bingo:
http://hgmonster.tumblr.com/post/250894209
http://tinyurl.com/yl5db68 Science Fiction important to human species’ survival. I hope, for one, that even more people get scared by 1984
(0)Today, I had to see what all the buzz was about. Me and my wife saw Avatar in 3D before she had to go to work. The 3D was a nice effect, but after over two hours of that, I had pretty bad motion sickness getting out of the theater. I think I’d enjoy the movie more minus the nausea.
spoiler alert ** do not continue if you don’t want the plot revealed (this is really intended reading for people who watched the movie anyway, not a proper review; I don’t do movie reviews)
“The penchant for kitsch is something that gay men and born-again Christians share.” (from Vanity Fair article attacking Creationist museum)
(0)http://tinyurl.com/ybfsnn9 Italian scientists bringing aurochs back from extinction. Will tarpans be next?
(0)
Comments