Posts by Stevie G

1) Questions and Answers : Preferences : What is Rosetta Beta? (Message 108776)
Posted 21 Dec 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
This may be a dumb question, but what is Rosetta Beta? How does it differ from normal Rosetta?

After a long dearth of Rosetta tasks, my computer has been running Rosetta Beta 6.04 with no problems.

But I don't know what it is.

Why the switch to Rosetta Beta 6.04?

Did they run out of standard Rosetta tasks?

Thanks.
S. Gaber
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108644)
Posted 24 Oct 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
Surgery is painful, no getting around it. She just finished a round of physical therapy and is getting along very well, almost without a limp. My wife is not tolerant of pain. But if she can do it, so can you. Don't be a wimp.


I suspect my hip replacement surgery would have been painful, but I got a moderate general anesthetic to begin with so I do not know. I was presumably on my back the whole time. When they did the heavy duty part of the surgery, they gave me a strong local anesthetic in the area of the operation. They removed the top of my leg bone and cleaned up the area of the hip. Insalled a ceramic ball in the top of he leg bone, a titanium socket in the bottom of the hip, and a miracle plastic bearing surface between them. Then put me back together. I forget if they sewed me up with thread or the self-dissolving kind. But I woke up about three hours after they began. I am told the procedure took less than an hour. They had me walk around the same day and do some exercises. The next day some physical therapy. They prescribed me some Oxycodone for pain if I needed it, but I was never in any pain, so I did not take any. They sent a physical therapist to my house 3x a week for less than an hour each time. Then I did outpatient therapy for a couple of months. I had no trouble driving. I did get a walker that I used for a couple of weeks, but after that it was more of a nuisance than a help, so I stopped using it.
At some point I asked my surgeon how long that plastic bearing would last and he said over 30 years. Since I do not expect to last another 30 years, I guess that will be OK.


"I forget if they sewed me up with thread or the self-dissolving kind. "

Usually, they put the self-absorbing sutures in muscle and underlying layers of facia and skin. They put silk of other fiber sutures to sew the wound together on the surface. At least that's what they did when I was an OR Tech years ago.
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108635)
Posted 19 Oct 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
"I'd never thought the human body would be stupid enough to put the pain in the wrong place." It's not a matter of stupidity. That is called referred pain and it is a common thing, contrary to your knowledge.
I do know about it (or have since summer when a friend told me of it) - but it's still horrendously stupid. Your car doesn't tell you it's out of oil when the petrol is low. We're wired up wrong.

The "barbaric tendency" to use only local anesthetics is reserved for people who are allergic to certain medications or who are old, infirm and have underlying conditions.
And dentists, who are pure evil.

Surgery is painful, no getting around it. She just finished a round of physical therapy and is getting along very well, almost without a limp. My wife is not tolerant of pain. But if she can do it, so can you. Don't be a wimp.

You are always complaining that most people are sissies. Here's your chance to decide whether or not you are a sissy.
Everybody hates pain. That's normal.

Others have told me getting hip replacement is wonderful, and better than the real thing. Doesn't sound that way with your wife.

The question is, should I get the operation or not? At the moment I get a small amount of pain on my thigh when moving certain ways, which can be avoided by using straps round my leg to keep it straight. I cannot run, but everything else, including hillwalking, is possible. I couldn't get a straight answer out of the doctor, since she's told to lie to patients to avoid the NHS paying. Would a replacement hip improve me or not?


Jean-David Beyer was lucky, never having much pain. My wife had a lot of pain for weeks. Then she got tendonitis and was in pain for several months. Physical therapy helped that, now she's fine.

You are way too cynical, bitter and sound unhappy. Lighten up.
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108630)
Posted 17 Oct 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
When my hip started to hurt,
For some reason my leg hurts, random places along the front thigh muscle. My friend, a massage therapist, suggested I should get x-rayed, I'd never thought the human body would be stupid enough to put the pain in the wrong place. But he insisted 7 of his patients had needed a hip done after complaining to him about pain there. Sure enough, the xray showed I have hip joints which are slightly misshapen, so have worn out 2x faster than they should of. The "great British NHS" won't give me an operation. I'm not important enough. Looks like I either lie in a couple of years and tell them it's worse than it is, or pay 12 grand for the operation.

The first way is to inject something like cortisone into the joint. He said that often works for around six months. But additional injections become progressively less effective.
Sounds pointless.

The second way is to do a hip replacement. There has been a lot of progress with this kind of surgery in the last decade or two. If I were younger, it is a one-day outpatient procedure. But for me they wanted to keep me overnight. Good thing too. On the next morning they did a final checkup prior to discharging me and it turned out my BP was 70/40 and they not only did not want to discharge me, they had me skip my BP medication. Apparently this is a common side-effect of the two anaesthetics they used on me.
Do they put you out cold? There seems to be a barbaric tendancy nowadays to use local anaesthetics and you're awake while they operate on you! My BP is stupidly high, and I don't take medication, because none of the 4 they tried have any effect on me, so I guess I won't have that problem.


"I'd never thought the human body would be stupid enough to put the pain in the wrong place." It's not a matter of stupidity. That is called referred pain and it is a common thing, contrary to your knowledge.

The "barbaric tendency" to use only local anesthetics is reserved for people who are allergic to certain medications or who are old, infirm and have underlying conditions. It is sometimes used for expediency, because i can be used in same-day surgery. But usually, general anesthesia is used for hip replacements. They may also be moving you around during the procedure. I assisted in these when I was an Operating Room Technician.

In 2017 we drove west and toured the amazing Utah national parks. But my wife had severe hip pain and could hardly walk or stand up, so we could not fully appreciate the region's beauty. She had a hip replacement and was much better in a few months. Then she had shoulder surgery, which she said might have been worse than the hip surgery. By 2923, her other hip had deteriorated, so she had second hip replacement. She's great now.

Surgery is painful, no getting around it. She just finished a round of physical therapy and is getting along very well, almost without a limp. My wife is not tolerant of pain. But if she can do it, so can you. Don't be a wimp.

You are always complaining that most people are sissies. Here's your chance to decide whether or not you are a sissy.
5) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108620)
Posted 16 Oct 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
Haven't been here for a while.
Just tried to read this thread, but stopped after a while.

Seems like a lot of users (actuall just one) are having a great time here!

But I would suggest to do more crunching and less posting.

Guys and Gals: Just relax.

Cheers to all ...
My computers do the crunching, leaving me free to piss people off.

And you seem to excel at that. :>))
6) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108552)
Posted 2 Sep 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
McAfee came with my computer parts. I haven't renewed it.

I use Malwarebytes Premium. Supposed to have web, malware, ransomware and exploitation protection.
7) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108550)
Posted 2 Sep 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
If only there was a way to disable beta.
Are you the one that makes graphs of task availability? Are they available for all projects? I was looking for Denis.
Nevermind, found it:
https://grafana.kiska.pw/d/boinc/boinc


That site was flagged by McAffee as "suspicious and risky."
8) Message boards : Number crunching : Rosetta Beta 6.00 (Message 108329)
Posted 22 Apr 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
This batch of 6.00 seems more stable and with less memory request
And graphic runs correctly!


WHAT batch of 6.00?

Is it Rosetta on BOINC?

Who is getting them? Not I.
9) Message boards : Number crunching : Rosetta Beta 6.00 (Message 108322)
Posted 18 Apr 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
"Rosetta is a resource hog."

It would be, if I got any tasks.

Steven Gaber
Oldsmar, FL
10) Message boards : Number crunching : Rosetta Beta 6.00 (Message 108320)
Posted 17 Apr 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
Boinc Manager says Rosetta uses 3.13GB.
Einstein uses 2.30GB.
Asteroids 1.29MB
Milky Way 24.0MB
Universe 8.17MB
WCG 148.48MB

Rosetta is a resource hog.

Steven Gaber
Oldsmar, FL
11) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108273)
Posted 2 Apr 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
[Quote]I am not a good tyoist.
(Titter)

I type pretty fast, but make a lot of mistakes.
My browser (and I assume all will do this) underlines spelling errors in red as you type. A quick glance before you send is all that's needed. Or you could even read the whole thing back.[quote]

Sure, gmail and most other browsers indicate spelling and grammar errors.

But BOINC does not.

Obviously, if it did, I would make those corrections. But it doesn't and I miss them.
12) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108272)
Posted 2 Apr 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
Back to the topic- looks like the servers are having issues again.

From 500,000 results per day being returned, it looks like it's dropped back to the 5,000 or so like last time. Even with the lack of new work, the return rate shouldn't have dropped off as much it has at this point in time.
Around 2300hrs Thursday some new work was sent out, and at the same time the return rate plummeted- even if the new Tasks are much longer running, all the existing ones should still continue to be returned at their much higher rate till their number are much, much lower than they are.



I haven't gotten a Rosetta file in a few days.

The server status says zero ready to send.

Obviously something is happening.
13) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108261)
Posted 31 Mar 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
I made a terrible typo.
Wouldn't be the first time.

I am not a good typist. I type pretty fast, but make a lot of mistakes.

What I meant was I would NEVER deny that evolution was accepted science. I'm an anthropologist ferchrissake. I used to teach this stuff.

I am certainly no reliigous nut. I have no religion at all.
Climate change is a religion. It requires belief in something without evidence.[/quote]

There is plenty of evidence for climate change. You just don't recognize it because you look out your window and don't see any change. It's a global phenomenon, not something seen out your window.

No, they won't. By the time the climate changes again, they will be extinct or in such low numbers as not to have a sufficient gene pool for a viable population.
We have many things in our bodies left over from a very very long time ago. Stuff we evolve tends to hang around unless it causes a problem. Like storing absurd amounts of fat.

What is now England was once a part of Europe. Sea level then was 300 feet lower than it is today (The Florida coastline then extended 80 miles further out into the Gulf of Mexico.) England used to be connected to Europe, but water built up by glacial ice melt caused a flood that washed away the land bridge that connected England to Europe and resulted in the English Channel. England was inhabited 40,000 years ago That's why Neanderthal remains have been found in England.
Indeed. The sea actually rose without man made "climate change", funny that. [/quote]

But it didn't happen in 100 years.

That is not what you said. What you said was there was nothing complicated about evolution. But the reality of it is much more nuanced. You don't believe in nuance.
I believe in getting to the point.[/quote]

You believe in getting to the point. But in rushing headlong to your point, you miss lots of critical details

In evolutionary terms, it doesn't matter whether you survive the virus or not if your genes are not passed to the next generation.
Dead people aren't usually in the habit of passing on their genes. [/quote]

EXACTLY! They died before passing on their genes. Therefore, they were less fit.
Vaccines made those who got it more fit.

[/quote]The next generation will consist of zero people susceptible to covid.[/quote]

NOPE. THE VIRUS WILL JUST MUTATE AGAIN, MANY TIMES. THAT'S ALREADY HAPPENED.

And the virus probably does not die out. It mutates to different strains, as was observed in the past several years.
[/quote]Like the common cold. But those immune to one are less susceptible to another.

Not necessarily.

Where do you get your information? Sample size of one? British tabloids?? Rupert Murdoch?

The fact that you so far have not contracted the virus could just be a matter of luck or non-exposure. You may get it yet.
It's a very low chance.[/quote]

A higher chance than if you'd been vaccinated.

Contrary to your belief, the vaccines are proven to be effective.
Look at the stats of people being admitted to hospital with serious covid, and how many were vaccinated.


Look at how many times they keep boosting people because the earlier ones failed. [/quote]

No, they keep boosting people because new strains of the virus emerge. One of those little details you ignore. You even get periodic booster shots with smallpox vaccinations, Polio shots, tetanus shots, shingles shots, flu shots, pneumonia shots, etc. Have you any idea how many lives have been saved by these? No, you don't. That's another detail you ignore.

As I said at the start of this convesation, I believe in reducung human suffering. But yoiu just chalk that up to coddling sissies.

True, some people got the vaccine and got COVID anyway. But it is proven that those who get the virus after being vaccinated are less likely to require hospitalization, are much less sick and recover faster.
I know people who got it worse the second time, even though the strain was milder. The difference? They'd been vaccinated.

Look at the stats from the USA in 2020. Most of those who died were Trump-following Republicans.
That proves nothing. They might just be less fit. [/quote]

Some of them were old. But most of them believed Trump's bullshit and flatly refused to be vaccinated. About a million of them died.

By technology, I mean the ability to make stone tools with which to hunt prey and make clothing from their skins to protect us from cold, the ability to make fire, build homes, grow crops. Those are technologies enabled by culture that have allowed humans to inhabit every place on earth, even to survive the arctic at the end of the ice age.


[/quote]And allow the weak to survive. Lets heat the caves so the sissies who can't stand the cold live on.[/quote]

I guess you never lived in the arctic during the ice age. Without fire, humans probably would not have lived through the Ice Age. Fire not only saved lives, it allowed a wider variety of foods to be eaten and helped preserve it. That's how technology allows us to expand out into the wider world.

You keep harping on those sissies. I wonder why? Maybe you are part Neanderthal. I don't think they had fire.
14) Message boards : Number crunching : Tells us your thoughts on granting credit for large protein, long-running tasks (Message 108257)
Posted 31 Mar 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
I think you need to allow more than three days for completion.

I can do those, but at the expense of my other projects.

S. Gaber
15) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108238)
Posted 30 Mar 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
I would say that evolution is not an acccepted scientific principle.

??
Maybe creationists or Intelligent Design's followers think this.


I recommend that you read Darwin's "On the Origin of Species." It is one of the most influential books of all time.

I read it. But i also read "The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster". I

I belong to the Flying Spaghetti Monster FB group.

Or, if you prefer, a good book from a my compatriot, Telmo Pievani, "Imperfection"


Haven't read that one yet.
16) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108237)
Posted 30 Mar 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
I look out of the window and I see what I saw 45 years ago. Climate change is an excuse for politicians to exert control, it's a religion, and everyone's falling for it.

45 ys are nothing.
And yes, climate change is a SCIENTIFIC fact.
Only Donald Trump think is not.

Well, Donald Trump is not the only one who rejects the idea of climate chane. . Don't forget all the oil, gas and coal corporations, the entire Repubican party in the USA and evangelical religious fanatics.

quote]I look out of the window and I see what I saw 45 years ago. Climate change is an excuse for politicians to exert control, it's a religion, and everyone's falling for it.[/quote]

Do you think looking out your window and seeing the same thing you saw 45 years ago will give you a true picture of what is happening in the wider world? Maybe your window is not near an ocean where it would be threatened by rising seawater. Maybe it's not in a hurricane-prone area. Maybe it's not in an area that has had no rain in two years.

Maybe you should consider looking beyond your window.
17) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108235)
Posted 30 Mar 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
I made a terrible typo. What I meant was I would NEVER deny that evolution was accepted science. I'm an anthropologist ferchrissake. I used to teach this stuff.

I am certainly no reliigous nut. I have no religion at all.

[quote]When the environment or the food sources change, those traits may no longer offer a survival advantage and those species will be less fit, not less strong.[quote]
[quoteBut they will maintain their improvement should the environment change back.[quote]
No, they won't. By the time the climate changes again, they will be extinct or in such low numbers as not to have a suficient gene pool for a viable population. They will soon be extinct. I believe that's what happened to the mammoths and mastodons in North America. Also, note that there are no mammoths or mastodons alive even in Siberia, where they thrived. There have been attempts to re-constitute mammoths from recovered mammoth DNA. But that would be stupid and cruel, even if successful. The environment that they evolved in no longe exists.

What is now England was once a part of Europe. Sea level then was 300 feet lower than it is today (The Florida coastline then extended 80 miles further out into the Gulf of Mexico.) England used to be connected to Europe, butwater built up by glacial ice melt caused a flood that washed away the land bridge that connected England to Europe and resulted in the English Channel. England was inhabited 40,000 years ago That's why Neanderthal remains have been found in England.

[quoteWhich is precisely what I said, but more longwinded.]
That is not what you said. What you said was there was nothing complicated about evolution. But the reality of it is much more nuanced. You don't believe in nuance.

[quote]You're still agreeing with me. Those of us with an unusual immunity to a nasty virus are the ones who survive. Thereby the virus dies out.[quote]
I did not agree with you. In evolutionary terms, it doesn't matter whether you survive the virus or not if your genes are not passed to the next generation. From an evolutionary standpoint, you might as well never have existed. And the virus probably does not die out. It mutates to different strains, as was observed in the past several years. The fact that you so far have not contracted the virus could just be a matte of luck or non-exposure. You may get it yet.

Contrary to your belief, the vaccines are proven to be effective. True, some people got the vaccine and got COVID anyway. But it is proven that those who get the virus after being vaccinated are less likely to require hospitalization, are much less sick and recover faster. Those who do not get the vaccine have a much greater chance of dying.
Look at the stats from the USA in 2020. Most of those who died were Trump-following Republicans.

[quote] We would be doing just fine without any technology, probably better. We would have lost all the weak we currently protect.[quote]
There yoiu go again with the strong vs. the weak theme.
By technology, I mean the ability to make stone tools with which to hunt prey and make clothing from their skins to protect us from cold, the ability to make fire, build homes, grow crops. Those are technologies enabled by culture that have allowed humans to inhabit every place on earth, even to survive the arctic at the end of the ice age.

I'm getting tired of this discussion.

It's obvious that no amount of reason, logic or data will convince you that your limited, nihilistic and self-absorbed perspective does not reflect the real world. Your view is more narrow and limited than nature, evolution, science and humanity. Your are already convinced that you know more than anybody else, that no other possibilities exist and that other points of view are worthless.
18) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108231)
Posted 30 Mar 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
You are wrong on several counts.
1. I would say that evolution is not an acccepted scientific principle. You either misquoted me or misunderstood me.
Only religious nuts dismiss evolution.

2. Your rigid, simplistic description is insufficient to explain what evolution is, how it works and what Darwin meant by "survival of the fittest." Kindly allow me to enlighten you.

Evolution is not a battle between the strong and the weak. You misunderstand "Survival of the fittest."

Survival means living long enough to pass your genes onto the next generation (although in 1859, Darwin didn't know about genes). The "fittest" does not mean the strongest. It means those indiividuals who are best adapted to the environmental condiitions at the time and place where they live. Those adaptions give them a better chance of surviving long enough to pass on their genes than those who lack those traits.
Which is precisely what I said, but more longwinded.

When the environment or the food sources change, those traits may no longer offer a survival advantage and those species will be less fit, not less strong.
But they will maintain their improvement should the environment change back.

New mutations occur more or less randomly over many generations.The changes need not be physically or statistically large. But iver a long time, and multiple generations, small survival advantages have large repurcussions. Some mutations will be beneficial and make indiividuals more fit for a new environment.
You're still agreeing with me. Those of us with an unusual immunity to a nasty virus are the ones who survive. Thereby the virus dies out.

Some species develop mutations that are too specialized and those will be evolutionary dead ends.
Gotta try everything.

And that, in a nutshell, is how evolution works. In evolutionary terms, there is no reason for 80 year-old men like me to exist. We do not partiicipate in the gene pool. (Although some studies indicate that grandparents enhance the survival of the species by looking after the young long enough for them to enter the gene pool.)
There you go then, the longer you live, the better off your kids and grandkids will be, financially for example.

If it were simply the strongest vs. the weakest, the dinosaurs would still be alive and small proto-rodents would not have proliiferated. But environmental conditions changed and the dinosaurs were not fit for the new conditions. The small rodents were ideally fit.
I never said strongest, I said fittest.

Generalists are species that can eat many foods or survive in a variety of conditions,. They have beter chances of survival than specialists, who depend on a certain plant, animal or environmental niche to survive. That is why rats, roaches and flies are found almost everywhere in the world (assisted by the presence of humans, who are also found almost everywhere in the world.)

[quote]Humans are generalists. We can eat almost anything organic and can live almostt anywhere, assisted by technology. The main survival adaptation that allows us to live anywhere in the world is CULTURE. which is learned behavior passed along to successive generations but not by genetics. Culture is the primary human adaption which allows us to develop the technology to survive in the arctic, tropics and desert regions of the world, occupying them very quickly in historical terms.
We would be doing just fine without any technology, probably better. We would have lost all the weak we currently protect.

The massive envirnmental changes that killed off the dinosaurs 65 million years ago were probably the result of the Chixilub meteor impact. That caused very quick change, relelasing huge amounts of debris and ash in the atmospherre, restructing sunlight, causuing unending global winter and the extnction of many plants and animals, ioncluding the dinosaurs.
And many species did survive.

Human activities have changed the atmosphere in only 200 years and those changes are accelerating rapidly.
An ice age is pretty rapid. Our so called global warming may well abate the next one. Whatever happens, we'll adapt, and it'll be fun.

Glaciers are melting and deserts are expanding worldwide. Sea levels are rising, killing the wetlands and mangroves that are the breeding grounds for thousands of species of fish
The sea level rose long before we did anything, the English Channel, you could walk across it!

Plants and animals cannot adapt to these climate changes quickly enough.
They don't have to, some will survive, some won't. Or they'll migrate. Humans and bird do this easily. Plants can also do it from seeds moving in birds's guts or by the wind.

We are witnessing -- causing-- the greatest extinction event in millions of years.
I look out of the window and I see what I saw 45 years ago. Climate change is an excuse for politicians to exert control, it's a religion, and everyone's falling for it.

I predict that you will dismiss all this and claim it is a girly outlook. But you may live long enough for it to affect you personally.
I look forward to the fun. The UK is an average climate, we'll be fine here, any change will be within acceptable limits for humans. Places which are already hot, just move north. The Russians will love all the extra crop growth.
19) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108228)
Posted 29 Mar 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
There's nothing complicated about evolution. The weak die off, the strong make the next generation. Until we messed it up and protected the weak.
Wrong.
It's the whole basis of the concept. If 50% of people die in contact with a certain virus, the next generation is made up of the offspring of the other 50%. I can't believe you're denying something this well known. What next, 2+2 is really 5?


You are wrong on several counts.
1. I would say that evolution is not an acccepted scientific principle. You either misquoted me or misunderstood me.
2. Your rigid, simplistic description is insufficient to explain what evolution is, how it works and what Darwin meant by "survival of the fittest." Kindly allow me to enlighten you.

Evolution is not a battle between the strong and the weak. You misunderstand "Survival of the fittest."

Survival means living long enough to pass your genes onto the next generation (although in 1859, Darwin didn't know about genes). The "fittest" does not mean the strongest. It means those indiividuals who are best adapted to the environmental condiitions at the time and place where they live. Those adaptions give them a better chance of surviving long enough to pass on their genes than those who lack those traits. When the envronment or the food sources change, those traits may no longer offer a survival advantage and those species will be less fit, not less strong. New mutations occur more or less randomly over many generations.The changes need not be physically or statistically large. But iver a long time, and multiple generations, small survival advantages have large repurcussions. Some mutations will be beneficial and make indiividuals more fit for a new environment. Some species develop mutations that are too specialized and those will be evolutionary dead ends.

And that, in a nutshell, is how evolution works. In evolutionary terms, there is no reason for 80 year-old men like me to exist. We do not partiicipate in the gene pool. (Although some studies indicate that grandparents enhance the survival of the species by looking after the young long enough for them to enter the gene pool.)

If it were simply the strongest vs. the weakest, the dinosaurs would still be alive and small proto-rodents would not have proliiferated. But environmental conditions changed and the dinosaurs were not fit for the new conditions. The small rodents were ideally fit.

Generalists are species that can eat many foods or survive in a variety of conditions,. They have beter chances of survival than specialists, who depend on a certain plant, animal or environmental niche to survive. That is why rats, roaches and flies are found almost everywhere in the world (assisted by the presence of humans, who are also found almost everywhere in the world.)

Humans are generalists. We can eat almost anything organic and can live almostt anywhere, assisted by technology. The main survival adaptation that allows us to live anywhere in the world is CULTURE. which is learned behavior passed along to successive generations but not by genetics. Culture is the primary human adaption which allows us to develop the technology to survive in the arctic, tropics and desert regions of the world, occupying them very quickly in historical terms.

Darwin studied finches in the Galapagos Islands. Through close observation, he noticed that finches on each island differed slightly from those on other islands. Those with big and strong beaks were better adapted to eat nuts and seeds. If an island is dominated by bushes and trees that produce seeds and nuts, big-beaked birds will have a survival advantage over small-beaked birds. If an island has mostly plants that produce berries, birds witrh thinner beaks are better adapted to eat berries and insects. The giant Galapagos tortoises were also unique to each island. Isolation results in speciation over many generations. Environmental change also results in speciation over many generations. But environmental change usually takes over thousands or millions of years, The massive envirnmental changes that killed off the dinosaurs 65 million years ago were probably the result of the Chixilub meteor impact. That caused very quick change, relelasing huge amounts of debris and ash in the atmospherre, restructing sunlight, causuing unending global winter and the extnction of many plants and animals, ioncluding the dinosaurs.

During the last Ice Age, the Pleistocene, North America had camels, mammoths, mastodons, horses, saber-toothed cats, dire wolves, There werre giant sloth bears 13 feet tall, turtles 6 feet in diameter and armadillos the size of Volkswagens. All very strong animanls well-adapted to ice age conditions. Then condiitions changed. The earth grew warmer and wetter. The plants that the herbivores depended on were replaced by new plants to which the herbivores were not adapted. They were less fit for the new circumstances and they all became extinct. The carnivores (dire wolves and saber-toothed cats) that depended on the herbivores for food also became extinct. Small mammals survived. Some anthropologists belive that the newly-arrived humans kiled off all the large boreal animals, but that is not likely. There weren't enough of them here to do that. By 10,000 BC, humans may have killed off the last of the sick and starving mammoths and mastodons that were left in North Ameriica.

Human activities have changed the atmosphere in only 200 years and those changes are accelerating rapidly. Glaciers are melting and deserts are expanding worldwide. Sea levels are rising, killing the wetlands and mangroves that are the breeding grounds for thousands of species of fish Plants and animals cannot adapt to these climate changes quickly enough. We are witnessing -- causing-- the greatest extinction event in millions of years. In nature, everything is connected to everything else -- the main principle of ecology. Humans do not live isoloated from nature. We are part of nature. We do not live in a vacuum. The Technologies that to a large extent caused these changes enable us tio insulate ourselves from the immediate impacts of these environmental changes. But snimals and plants do not have these technologies. We can't kill off most of the plants, animals, fish, birds, whales in the world without some effects. This will catch up to us eventually.

I predict that you will dismiss all this and claim it is a girly outlook. But you may live long enough for it to affect you personally.

Your 2+2=5 line is bullshit and insulting.

I recommend that you read Darwin's "On the Origin of Species." It is one of the most influential books of all time.
20) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 108220)
Posted 28 Mar 2023 by Stevie G
Post:
I am anthropologist (Iactually an archqaeologist, but archaeology is a branch of Anthropology.) , so I an certasinly not going to say it is not an established scientific fact.

I am going to explain what Darwin meant and how you misinterpreted it.

But not now. I'm goin to bed

There's nothing complicated about evolution. The weak die off, the strong make the next generation. Until we messed it up and protected the weak.


Wrong.


Next 20



©2024 University of Washington
https://www.bakerlab.org