Friday, May 23, 2014
Fetal Pig Dissection
In biology we all had to pick groups and a section of the pig that we were going to go through the pig to find and our group did the second group witch had to deal with the heart. I also learned all the parts our group had to find and the other groups too. I quizzed on it and I didn't miss any! Got a 100%! It was pretty cool!
Friday, May 16, 2014
Evolution Discussion
Nicolle Pagliacci
Biology 3rd
5-8-14
Evolution Discussion Essay
Evolution is a descent of organisms from common ancestors with the development of genetic and phenotypic changes over time that make them more suited to the environment, evolving into something more efficient, more able to survive. Everything starts out as primitive. Babies with every species cannot defend themselves until they are trained and learn how to do all of that to stay alive.
There were many people involved in the learning and exploring of the evolution theory. Most were successful but some were shunned and disliked. Charles Darwin's grandfather, Erasmus Darwin, was one of the leading intellectuals of eighteenth century England, a man with a lot of interests and goals. Erasmus Darwin was a respected physician, a well known poet, philosopher, botanist, and naturalist. He was a naturalist that put together one of the first formal theories of Evolution in Zoonomia, or, The Laws of Organic Life (1794-1796). He also presented his evolutionary ideas in verse in particular in the published poem The Temple of Nature. He did not come up with natural selection but he did discuss ideas that his grandson elaborated on sixty years later, such as how life evolved from a single common ancestor, forming "one living filament". Erasmus had a hard time with the question of how one species could evolve into another. His ideas on evolution were similar to Lamarck's ideas on evolution. Erasmus Darwin also talked about how competition and sexual selection could cause changes in living things: "The final course of this contest among males seems to be, that the strongest and most active animal should propagate the species which should thus be improved" He arrived at his conclusions using an integrative method: he used his observations of domesticated animals, the behavior of wildlife, and he integrated his heavy knowledge of many different fields, such as paleontology, biogeography, systematics, embryology, and comparative anatomy.
One of the more disliked evolutionists, Jean Baptiste Lamarck, wasn’t as successful as all the others. His scientific theories were largely ignored or attacked during his lifetime. Lamarck never won the acceptance and esteem of his colleagues Buffon and Cuvier. The name Lamarck is associated merely with a harmed theory of heredity, the "inheritance of acquired traits. Evolutionists like Charles Darwin, Lyell, Haeckel, and other early evolutionists acknowledged him as a great zoologist and as a forerunner of evolution. Darwin noted this about him, “Lamarck was the first man whose conclusions on the subject excited much attention. This justly celebrated naturalist first published his views in 1801. . . he first did the eminent service of arousing attention to the probability of all changes in the organic, as well as in the inorganic world, being the result of law, and not of miraculous interposition.” He died in poverty and obscurity.
Georges Cuvier was born on August 23, 1769, at Montbéliard, a French-speaking community in the Jura Mountains that was not under French order at the time. Cuvier studied at the Carolinian Academy in Stuttgart, from 1784 to 1788. Tutored a nice, good family in Normandy. It kept him out of the way of violence from the French Revolution. There he was put in a position in the local government and started making his reputation as a naturalist. In 1795, Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire invited him to come to Paris. There he was appointed as an assistant, and shortly after, a professor of animal anatomy at the newly reformed Musée National d'Histoire Naturelle (National Museum of Natural History). He stayed at his post when Napoleon came to power. Then he was appointed to several government positions, including Inspector-General of public education and State Councillor, by Napoleon. He continued being a state councillor under the three successive Kings of France. All the while, Cuvier lectured and did research at the Musée National, amazing his colleagues with his energy and devotion to science. By the time of his death he had been knighted and made a baron and a peer of France.
Georges did not believe in organic evolution. He thought any change in an organism's anatomy would have made it unable to survive. He studied the mummified cats and ibises that Geoffroy brought back from Napoleon's invasion of Egypt. It showed that they were no different from their living equals. Cuvier used this evidence to support his claim that life forms did not evolve over time. Organisms were functional wholes and that any change in one part would mess up the sensitive balance. The functional integration of organisms meant that each part of an organism, no matter how small, bore signs of the whole. So then it was possible to regenerate organisms from small remains of the organism, based on rational principles. He could put together organisms from their little remains and many of his reconstructions turned out to be strikingly accurate!
"In October 1838, that is, fifteen months after I had begun my systematic inquiry, I happened to read for amusement Malthus on Population, and being well prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on from long- continued observation of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved, and unfavourable ones to be destroyed. The results of this would be the formation of a new species. Here, then I had at last got a theory by which to work".
Charles Darwin, from his autobiography. (1876)
This quoted passage is referred to often and it reflects the significance that Darwin affords Malthus in putting together his theory of Natural Selection. What "struck" Darwin in Essay on the Principle of Population (1798) was Malthus's observation that nature plants and animals produce far more offspring than can survive, and that Man is too capable of overproducing if left unchecked. He concluded that unless the family size was regulated, man's famine would become globally epidemic and eventually consume us. According to Thomas, poverty and famine were natural outcomes of population growth and food supply was not plenty among the people who believed that with good social structures, all of mans problems could be solved. Although he thought that poverty and famine was normal, the ultimate reason for those outcomes was divine institution. He believed that such natural outcomes were God's way of preventing man from being lazy. Both Darwin and Wallace separately arrived at similar theories of Natural Selection after reading Malthus. They realized that producing more babies than can survive creates a competitive environment among siblings, and that the difference among siblings would produce some individuals with a slightly greater chance of survival.
In December 1831, a new chapter in the history of biology had its humble origins. A 22-year old naturalist, Charles Darwin, set sail on a journey of a lifetime aboard the British naval vessel the HMS Beagle. Darwins mission jon his journey around the world was to expand the navy’s knowledge of natural resources such as water and food in foreign lands. The captain of the Beagle, Robert Fitzroy, also hoped that Darwin would find evidence to support the biblical account of creation. Other than Fitzroy’s wishes, Darwin amassed observations that would eventually support another way of thinking and change the history of biology and science foredcer. The pre-Darwinian worldview and the post-Darwinian worldview are contrasted. Before Darwin, the worldview was forged by deep seated beliefs that were held to be intractable truths and not by experimentation and observation of the natural world. It is often believed that Darwin forged this change in worldview by himself, several biologists during the preceding century and some of Darwin’s contemporaries slowly began to accept the idea that species change over time. This concept would eventually be known as evolution.
There were also mid-eighteenth-century contributions. Taxonomy, which was one of them, is the science of classifying organisms, was important during the mid-eighteenth century. Leader of the taxonomists was Carolus Linnaeus, who developed the binomial system of nomenclature and who developed a system of classification for things. Linnaeus, like other taxonomists of his time, believed in the fixity of species. Each species had an “ideal” structure and function and also a place in the scala naturae, a sequential ladder of life. The simplest and most material being was on the lowest rung of the ladder, and the most complex and spiritual being was on the highest rung. Looking at it this way, humans are at the highest rung on the ladder.
Darwin took Charles Lyell’s Principles of Geology on the voyage around the world. This book presented arguments to support a theory of how the land on earth changes, proposed by James Hutton. Different from the catastrophics, Hutton believed the Earth had slow but continuous erosion and uplift. Both land and marine fossils are found throughout sedimentary deposits. Rivers washed down any but not all, fossils on land that were small.
My opinion on evolution to me, is real. Theres so much proof of evolution besides that one missing link that we never found but just because there is only ONE missing link does not mean that aaaallll of that evidence and proof is just false and lies. When you think with logic and not faith, evolution is real. You gotta have evidence to make or prove a point and that is exactly what all of these evolutionists did! They got evidence, wrote down all the possible things and together, figured out evolution and that humans came from, not necessarily specs but somewhat like that, starting in the ocean and over billions and billions of years, here we are! Evolution was not just for humans either. It happened and maybe still is happening to us and other animals and things in the ocean! Evolution, to me, did happen and is still happening. Theres no other way to say it. You either believe it happened or not.
In conclusion about evolution, it was/is a timely process for all living organisms to evolve and go through all of their stages of evolution and its how we got to be what we are now. Darwin, Lamarck, and the other evolutionists were very smart and gained a lot of knowledge and did a lot of work to find out what we know today and it is much appreciated by everyone that believes evolution now-a-days.
Biology 3rd
5-8-14
Evolution Discussion Essay
Evolution is a descent of organisms from common ancestors with the development of genetic and phenotypic changes over time that make them more suited to the environment, evolving into something more efficient, more able to survive. Everything starts out as primitive. Babies with every species cannot defend themselves until they are trained and learn how to do all of that to stay alive.
There were many people involved in the learning and exploring of the evolution theory. Most were successful but some were shunned and disliked. Charles Darwin's grandfather, Erasmus Darwin, was one of the leading intellectuals of eighteenth century England, a man with a lot of interests and goals. Erasmus Darwin was a respected physician, a well known poet, philosopher, botanist, and naturalist. He was a naturalist that put together one of the first formal theories of Evolution in Zoonomia, or, The Laws of Organic Life (1794-1796). He also presented his evolutionary ideas in verse in particular in the published poem The Temple of Nature. He did not come up with natural selection but he did discuss ideas that his grandson elaborated on sixty years later, such as how life evolved from a single common ancestor, forming "one living filament". Erasmus had a hard time with the question of how one species could evolve into another. His ideas on evolution were similar to Lamarck's ideas on evolution. Erasmus Darwin also talked about how competition and sexual selection could cause changes in living things: "The final course of this contest among males seems to be, that the strongest and most active animal should propagate the species which should thus be improved" He arrived at his conclusions using an integrative method: he used his observations of domesticated animals, the behavior of wildlife, and he integrated his heavy knowledge of many different fields, such as paleontology, biogeography, systematics, embryology, and comparative anatomy.
One of the more disliked evolutionists, Jean Baptiste Lamarck, wasn’t as successful as all the others. His scientific theories were largely ignored or attacked during his lifetime. Lamarck never won the acceptance and esteem of his colleagues Buffon and Cuvier. The name Lamarck is associated merely with a harmed theory of heredity, the "inheritance of acquired traits. Evolutionists like Charles Darwin, Lyell, Haeckel, and other early evolutionists acknowledged him as a great zoologist and as a forerunner of evolution. Darwin noted this about him, “Lamarck was the first man whose conclusions on the subject excited much attention. This justly celebrated naturalist first published his views in 1801. . . he first did the eminent service of arousing attention to the probability of all changes in the organic, as well as in the inorganic world, being the result of law, and not of miraculous interposition.” He died in poverty and obscurity.
Georges Cuvier was born on August 23, 1769, at Montbéliard, a French-speaking community in the Jura Mountains that was not under French order at the time. Cuvier studied at the Carolinian Academy in Stuttgart, from 1784 to 1788. Tutored a nice, good family in Normandy. It kept him out of the way of violence from the French Revolution. There he was put in a position in the local government and started making his reputation as a naturalist. In 1795, Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire invited him to come to Paris. There he was appointed as an assistant, and shortly after, a professor of animal anatomy at the newly reformed Musée National d'Histoire Naturelle (National Museum of Natural History). He stayed at his post when Napoleon came to power. Then he was appointed to several government positions, including Inspector-General of public education and State Councillor, by Napoleon. He continued being a state councillor under the three successive Kings of France. All the while, Cuvier lectured and did research at the Musée National, amazing his colleagues with his energy and devotion to science. By the time of his death he had been knighted and made a baron and a peer of France.
Georges did not believe in organic evolution. He thought any change in an organism's anatomy would have made it unable to survive. He studied the mummified cats and ibises that Geoffroy brought back from Napoleon's invasion of Egypt. It showed that they were no different from their living equals. Cuvier used this evidence to support his claim that life forms did not evolve over time. Organisms were functional wholes and that any change in one part would mess up the sensitive balance. The functional integration of organisms meant that each part of an organism, no matter how small, bore signs of the whole. So then it was possible to regenerate organisms from small remains of the organism, based on rational principles. He could put together organisms from their little remains and many of his reconstructions turned out to be strikingly accurate!
"In October 1838, that is, fifteen months after I had begun my systematic inquiry, I happened to read for amusement Malthus on Population, and being well prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on from long- continued observation of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved, and unfavourable ones to be destroyed. The results of this would be the formation of a new species. Here, then I had at last got a theory by which to work".
Charles Darwin, from his autobiography. (1876)
This quoted passage is referred to often and it reflects the significance that Darwin affords Malthus in putting together his theory of Natural Selection. What "struck" Darwin in Essay on the Principle of Population (1798) was Malthus's observation that nature plants and animals produce far more offspring than can survive, and that Man is too capable of overproducing if left unchecked. He concluded that unless the family size was regulated, man's famine would become globally epidemic and eventually consume us. According to Thomas, poverty and famine were natural outcomes of population growth and food supply was not plenty among the people who believed that with good social structures, all of mans problems could be solved. Although he thought that poverty and famine was normal, the ultimate reason for those outcomes was divine institution. He believed that such natural outcomes were God's way of preventing man from being lazy. Both Darwin and Wallace separately arrived at similar theories of Natural Selection after reading Malthus. They realized that producing more babies than can survive creates a competitive environment among siblings, and that the difference among siblings would produce some individuals with a slightly greater chance of survival.
In December 1831, a new chapter in the history of biology had its humble origins. A 22-year old naturalist, Charles Darwin, set sail on a journey of a lifetime aboard the British naval vessel the HMS Beagle. Darwins mission jon his journey around the world was to expand the navy’s knowledge of natural resources such as water and food in foreign lands. The captain of the Beagle, Robert Fitzroy, also hoped that Darwin would find evidence to support the biblical account of creation. Other than Fitzroy’s wishes, Darwin amassed observations that would eventually support another way of thinking and change the history of biology and science foredcer. The pre-Darwinian worldview and the post-Darwinian worldview are contrasted. Before Darwin, the worldview was forged by deep seated beliefs that were held to be intractable truths and not by experimentation and observation of the natural world. It is often believed that Darwin forged this change in worldview by himself, several biologists during the preceding century and some of Darwin’s contemporaries slowly began to accept the idea that species change over time. This concept would eventually be known as evolution.
There were also mid-eighteenth-century contributions. Taxonomy, which was one of them, is the science of classifying organisms, was important during the mid-eighteenth century. Leader of the taxonomists was Carolus Linnaeus, who developed the binomial system of nomenclature and who developed a system of classification for things. Linnaeus, like other taxonomists of his time, believed in the fixity of species. Each species had an “ideal” structure and function and also a place in the scala naturae, a sequential ladder of life. The simplest and most material being was on the lowest rung of the ladder, and the most complex and spiritual being was on the highest rung. Looking at it this way, humans are at the highest rung on the ladder.
Darwin took Charles Lyell’s Principles of Geology on the voyage around the world. This book presented arguments to support a theory of how the land on earth changes, proposed by James Hutton. Different from the catastrophics, Hutton believed the Earth had slow but continuous erosion and uplift. Both land and marine fossils are found throughout sedimentary deposits. Rivers washed down any but not all, fossils on land that were small.
My opinion on evolution to me, is real. Theres so much proof of evolution besides that one missing link that we never found but just because there is only ONE missing link does not mean that aaaallll of that evidence and proof is just false and lies. When you think with logic and not faith, evolution is real. You gotta have evidence to make or prove a point and that is exactly what all of these evolutionists did! They got evidence, wrote down all the possible things and together, figured out evolution and that humans came from, not necessarily specs but somewhat like that, starting in the ocean and over billions and billions of years, here we are! Evolution was not just for humans either. It happened and maybe still is happening to us and other animals and things in the ocean! Evolution, to me, did happen and is still happening. Theres no other way to say it. You either believe it happened or not.
In conclusion about evolution, it was/is a timely process for all living organisms to evolve and go through all of their stages of evolution and its how we got to be what we are now. Darwin, Lamarck, and the other evolutionists were very smart and gained a lot of knowledge and did a lot of work to find out what we know today and it is much appreciated by everyone that believes evolution now-a-days.
Sources Cited:
Biology book from school pages 283-303
A History of Evolutionary Thought, http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/evothought.html
Accessed May 8, 9, 2014
Wednesday, May 14, 2014
Did Darwin Do It All?
Nicolle Pagliacci
Part 1.
1. Erasmus Darwin- (1731-1802)
Charles Darwin's grandfather, Erasmus Darwin, was one of the leading intellectuals of eighteenth century England, a man with a lot of interests and goals. Erasmus Darwin was a respected physician, a well known poet, philosopher, botanist, and naturalist. He was a naturalist that put together one of the first formal theories of Evolution in Zoonomia, or, The Laws of Organic Life (1794-1796). He also presented his evolutionary ideas in verse in particular in the published poem The Temple of Nature. He did not come up with natural selection but he did discuss ideas that his grandson elaborated on sixty years later, such as how life evolved from a single common ancestor, forming "one living filament". Erasmus had a hard time with the question of how one species could evolve into another. His ideas on evolution were similar to Lamarck's ideas on evolution. Erasmus Darwin also talked about how competition and sexual selection could cause changes in living things: "The final course of this contest among males seems to be, that the strongest and most active animal should propagate the species which should thus be improved" He arrived at his conclusions using an integrative method: he used his observations of domesticated animals, the behavior of wildlife, and he integrated his heavy knowledge of many different fields, such as paleontology, biogeography, systematics, embryology, and comparative anatomy.
2. Jean Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829)
Scientific theories were largely ignored or attacked during his lifetime. Lamarck never won the acceptance and esteem of his colleagues Buffon and Cuvier. The name Lamarck is associated merely with a harmed theory of heredity, the "inheritance of acquired traits. Evolutionists like Charles Darwin, Lyell, Haeckel, and other early evolutionists acknowledged him as a great zoologist and as a forerunner of evolution. Darwin noted this about him, “Lamarck was the first man whose conclusions on the subject excited much attention. This justly celebrated naturalist first published his views in 1801. . . he first did the eminent service of arousing attention to the probability of all changes in the organic, as well as in the inorganic world, being the result of law, and not of miraculous interposition.” He died in poverty and obscurity.
3. Georges Cuvier (1769-1832)
Born on August 23, 1769, at Montbéliard, a French-speaking community in the Jura Mountains that was not under French order at the time. Cuvier studied at the Carolinian Academy in Stuttgart, from 1784 to 1788. Tutored a nice, good family in Normandy. It kept him out of the way of violence from the French Revolution. There he was put in a position in the local government and started making his reputation as a naturalist. In 1795, Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire invited him to come to Paris. There he was appointed as an assistant, and shortly after, a professor of animal anatomy at the newly reformed Musée National d'Histoire Naturelle (National Museum of Natural History). He stayed at his post when Napoleon came to power. Then he was appointed to several government positions, including Inspector-General of public education and State Councillor, by Napoleon. He continued being a state councillor under the three successive Kings of France. All the while, Cuvier lectured and did research at the Musée National, amazing his colleagues with his energy and devotion to science. By the time of his death he had been knighted and made a baron and a peer of France.
Georges did not believe in organic evolution. He thought any change in an organism's anatomy would have made it unable to survive. He studied the mummified cats and ibises that Geoffroy brought back from Napoleon's invasion of Egypt. It showed that they were no different from their living equals. Cuvier used this evidence to support his claim that life forms did not evolve over time. Organisms were functional wholes and that any change in one part would mess up the sensitive balance. The functional integration of organisms meant that each part of an organism, no matter how small, bore signs of the whole. So then it was possible to regenerate organisms from small remains of the organism, based on rational principles. He could put together organisms from their little remains and many of his reconstructions turned out to be strikingly accurate!
4. Thomas Malthus (1766-1834)
"In October 1838, that is, fifteen months after I had begun my systematic inquiry, I happened to read for amusement Malthus on Population, and being well prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on from long- continued observation of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved, and unfavourable ones to be destroyed. The results of this would be the formation of a new species. Here, then I had at last got a theory by which to work".
Charles Darwin, from his autobiography. (1876)
This quoted passage is referred to often and it reflects the significance that Darwin affords Malthus in putting together his theory of Natural Selection. What "struck" Darwin in Essay on the Principle of Population (1798) was Malthus's observation that nature plants and animals produce far more offspring than can survive, and that Man is too capable of overproducing if left unchecked. He concluded that unless the family size was regulated, man's famine would become globally epidemic and eventually consume us. According to Thomas, poverty and famine were natural outcomes of population growth and food supply was not plenty among the people who believed that with good social structures, all of mans problems could be solved. Although he thought that poverty and famine was normal, the ultimate reason for those outcomes was divine institution. He believed that such natural outcomes were God's way of preventing man from being lazy. Both Darwin and Wallace separately arrived at similar theories of Natural Selection after reading Malthus. They realized that producing more babies than can survive creates a competitive environment among siblings, and that the difference among siblings would produce some individuals with a slightly greater chance of survival.
Part 2.
1. What interesting evidence of geological change did Darwin observe while visiting the Galapagos?
That the earth changes over time.
2. What did Darwin learn about the Galapagos finches when he returned to England? What vital information had he neglected to record when he collected them?
he learned that his finches comprised 13 species.
3. Describe the distribution pattern of Galapagos mockingbirds. What question did this raise in Darwin's mind?
He cound 13 different spiecies on the islands.
Friday, April 4, 2014
Questions about GATTACA!
Questions about GATTACA!
Choose several of the following questions to discuss in a blog post reflection on the movie GATTACA. This reflection might be used as an artifact on your portfolio page 4 and could help demonstrate your awareness of the effects of science and technology upon society.
1. The following terms were used in the movie. How do they relate to the words we use: degenerate and invalid?
De-gene-erate
In-valid
Borrowed Ladder
2. Why do you think Vincent left his family, tearing his picture out of the family photo, after winning the swimming race against his brother?
Because he realized he was able to do things if he really put his mind to it, no matter how difficult or complex, he can do it, so he went to go fufil his dreams because he knew he could do it, and he took his picture so his family wouldnt see that picture and miss him so much.
3. Describe the relationship between Vincent and Anton.
It was a very competitive relationship.
4. When Jerome Morrow said to Vincent/Jerome, “They’re not looking for you. When they look at you, they only see me,” what did he mean? Can you find any parallels to this type of situation in real life?
He meant since he was paralized and couldnt go anywhere and Vincent had his look and everything, his whole ID basically, they would just assume it was Jerome. They never knew a “Vincent” so they will expect Jerome to be Jerome.
5. Choose your favorite character from the film. Explain why you choose that person. Would you want to be that person? Why? Why not?
My favorite character was Vincent because I saw a little of how I think in how he thinks and acts. I would not want to be this person because with my own problems I would not want to undergo so much stress and anxiety.
6. At the end of the film, you are told that the Doctor knew about Vincent all along. Why did the Doctor go along with the fraud? What would you have done if you were the Doctor?
He went along with it because his son was also born naturally or was an “in-valid”. If i was the doctor i would have let im slide also cause its proving all the valid people wrong that an imperfect person does have willpower to achieve their dreams however and whatever it takes, even if its not easy.
7. The technology to do what was done in the movie is definitely possible within the next ten years. Do you think that Vincent’s world could eventually happen in America? Why?
I think that it is already there. If you go look in the big bussinesses, all the stuff you see in movies is there. Its only available to the rich or whoever can afford it. It will get to everyone eventually in time.
8. What do you think is wrong with the society portrayed in "GATTACA"? What is right?
No one acts like they have emotions, they are like robots, but, they are all perfect, so thats another thing wrong with the society, everyones the same not themselves.
9. What were the screenwriters trying to tell us through the episode of the 12-fingered pianist? Is anything wrong with engineering children to have 12 fingers if, as a result, they will be able to make extraordinarily beautiful music?
That you can make someone with 12 fingers if you wanted to. there is nothing wrong with it as long as it is used for their life like the pianist, his fingers are his career. Also not everyones a piano master.
10. You and your spouse are having a child and are at the Genetic Clinic pictured in the movie. What characteristics would you want for your child and what would you ask to be excluded? Why would you make those choices?
I would want my kid to be smart, blonde, bright blue eyes, a good height, good at sports, and i would want them to exclude every mental problem, disorder, or disease they might have inherited from either me or my spouse. I would make these choices so they dont have to struggle in life and they could be able to just do what they wanted easily.
11. Picture yourself as either Vincent, Jerome, or Anton. Would you have acted the same or done things differently if you were in the same world as them?
Everything vincent did, if i was in his situation, I would do. Its a smart and flawless plan.
12. How does the society portrayed in GATTACA resemble the type of society that some Americans were hoping for during the height of the Eugenics movement?
Its a little extreme like going to space. thats not goin to happen for another like 50 more more years. everything else is pretty muvh already getting that way.
Thursday, April 3, 2014
DNA Sequencing activity- Worksheet
This is the results of the DNA sequencing activity.
Norms' DNA was normal of course, everything went together smoothly with sequencing his DNA. Abby's DNA was easy also, though there was only one spot where her DNA was different than the others. Bob and his sequence was quite similar to Norms' and Abby's DNA. Now, Carol's DNA sequence was very different. the sequence she showed was mostly C's and G's. So, according to Carol's DNA shows that she may have some genetic mutations or a disease. Bob and Abby, on the other hand, are less likely to have genetic mutations or diseases.
Flashcards for DNA or RNA
I made flashcards for all of the key terms for Biology using Quizlet so heres all the cards i put together. I also know that using these card will help me with any biology related stuff such as quizzes or tests and what not or anything about DNA or RNA or anything like that.
Here is the link to my quiz cards! \^.^/ http://quizlet.com/39966957/from-dna-to-proteins-flash-cards/
Here is the link to my quiz cards! \^.^/ http://quizlet.com/39966957/from-dna-to-proteins-flash-cards/
Friday, March 28, 2014
Copying the Code DNA
With this copying the code worksheet/internet assignment, I learned a few things about DNA and how to tell the difference between observations, opinions, and inferences. I sorted though all the clues in my mind and decided which ones represent solid evidence of DNA replication and transcription/translation. For example, When DNA from a virus is injected into a bacterium, the bacterium produces viral protein and thats evidence supporting transcription/translation.
4. Write an explanation detailing why this clue represents solid data and is not an opinion or an inference.
Clue 8 is solid data and not an opinion or an inference because it explains what they saw and what happened step by step and what it was with what was happening by saying the bacteria with heavy DNA, when it was transferred to a culture tube with lighter nitrogen, did form DNA molecules that were made of half heavy and half light. It gives reasons and it explains what happened therefor, it IS solid fact and NOT opinion OR inference.
5. a) Why is it difficult to tell the difference between an observation and an inference?
It is hard to tell the difference between an observation and an inference because an inference is a conclusion or a deduction based on observations and an observation is data collected with any of the senses or tools such as graduated cylinders, dalliances, rulers or pH meters.
b) Which of the clues included in the table is an inference?
Clue 9, It also goes step by step in what happened and kinda how it happened also.
c) Which of the clues included in the table is an opinion?
Clue 10, it seems like it is just a statement made with only some knowledge of DNA.
6. Francis Crick was the first to recognize that information flows from DNA to RNA to protein. This concepts known as the Central Dogma. At the time the Central Dogma was first stated, it was an inference based on observations. Explain why.
Because no one knew for real weather it was that way or not. No one actually looked yet so they just guessed.
4. Write an explanation detailing why this clue represents solid data and is not an opinion or an inference.
Clue 8 is solid data and not an opinion or an inference because it explains what they saw and what happened step by step and what it was with what was happening by saying the bacteria with heavy DNA, when it was transferred to a culture tube with lighter nitrogen, did form DNA molecules that were made of half heavy and half light. It gives reasons and it explains what happened therefor, it IS solid fact and NOT opinion OR inference.
5. a) Why is it difficult to tell the difference between an observation and an inference?
It is hard to tell the difference between an observation and an inference because an inference is a conclusion or a deduction based on observations and an observation is data collected with any of the senses or tools such as graduated cylinders, dalliances, rulers or pH meters.
b) Which of the clues included in the table is an inference?
Clue 9, It also goes step by step in what happened and kinda how it happened also.
c) Which of the clues included in the table is an opinion?
Clue 10, it seems like it is just a statement made with only some knowledge of DNA.
6. Francis Crick was the first to recognize that information flows from DNA to RNA to protein. This concepts known as the Central Dogma. At the time the Central Dogma was first stated, it was an inference based on observations. Explain why.
Because no one knew for real weather it was that way or not. No one actually looked yet so they just guessed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)