269 réponses à ce sujet

[Nostradamoose]

Collider wrote...

Ecael wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Ecael wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

This topic now deserves to die...

...unless master thief Kasumi Goto decides to make an appearance.

I lost the e-mail address on that account a week ago, so I can't log into it anymore to make any posts on the forum.

Either that or it was the crazy password I made for it that I can't remember for the life of me (kind of ironic, considering it is Kasumi Goto we're talking about here).

You sure it aint "Perugia"?

I guess I didn't get the right voiceprint.

I did get this credit chit though!

The credit chit thing always amused me. You'd think they'd have chosen something less...similar to another word. Chip? Tablet? Disk? Module?

No, Seriously, what the hell is this CHIT.

Huh?


*Bad pun intended, sorry*

[Kaiser Shepard]

Ecael wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Ecael wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

This topic now deserves to die...

...unless master thief Kasumi Goto decides to make an appearance.

I lost the e-mail address on that account a week ago, so I can't log into it anymore to make any posts on the forum.

Either that or it was the crazy password I made for it that I can't remember for the life of me (kind of ironic, considering it is Kasumi Goto we're talking about here).

You sure it aint "Perugia"?

I guess I didn't get the right voiceprint.

I did get this credit chit though!

It's clean.

[adam_grif]

Sure is spam in here.

[Nostradamoose]

IT'S A PLANT!

[Ecael]

adam_grif wrote...

Sure is spam in here.

I'm kind of waiting for the moderator to lock the thread...

[Nostradamoose]

Ecael wrote...

adam_grif wrote...

Sure is spam in here.

I'm kind of waiting for the moderator to lock the thread...

Moderators died in the great moderation fire of 2007


Sorry to burst thy bubble

[PTPR]

Haha, downhill forum goes downhill.

[Onyx Jaguar]

So, how do we get to talking about Genetics again?

[PTPR]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

So, how do we get to talking about Genetics again?

Well, if I read the thread right, you share the exact same genetics as Ecael.

[Nostradamoose]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

So, how do we get to talking about Genetics again?

 There's only one way to do it! 

[Onyx Jaguar]

PTPR wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

So, how do we get to talking about Genetics again?

Well, if I read the thread right, you share the exact same genetics as Ecael.

Unforunately the person I was arguing with has left the thread it seems  

[Kaiser Shepard]

Okay guys, let's stop this. Let's all be Jentha and get this topic back ontopic.



Personally, I think Krogan and Drell might also have a larger genetic variance than most other races, because Harbinger says they are also good enough for a Reaper.

[Nostradamoose]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Okay guys, let's stop this. Let's all be Jentha and get this topic back ontopic.

Personally, I think Krogan and Drell might also have a larger genetic variance than most other races, because Harbinger says they are also good enough for a Reaper.

One is neutered and lost a lot of genetic variability and the other is the small remnant of an almost dead species...

Therefore...

Genetic variation is almost as bad as a Louisania swamp village...

Modifié par Nostradamoose, 19 avril 2010 - 03:53 .

[Xaijin]

Nostradamoose wrote...

Xaijin wrote...

Nostradamoose wrote...

Xaijin wrote...

Nostradamoose wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

PTPR wrote...
There is a significant difference between a border collie and a beagle.

Sure but both animals are indisputably inferior to the animal from which domestic dogs were originally breed. They are not evolved animals in any way, if anything they have devolved in several ways from the original species.

Alright now since I can't reach through the internet and swat you upside the head myself I'll have to ask you to either do it yourself or have someone close by do it.  Assuming you didn't do that I'll carry on anyway.  I hear statements like this all the time and it pisses me off to no end because it usually comes from people who don't know what they're talking about.

Evolution has nothing to do with superiority, evolution is not some means towards an end goal.  By your logic, flies are inferior to humans, therefore flies are not evolved organisms.  Every organism is an evolved organism superiority doesn't enter into it.

Yea? Evolution only takes in consideration the ability to reproduce, not to be the fastest, largest, strongest mother****er around.

Get over it, Beagles were selectively bred to be beagles, they did not really evolved there. The laws of evolution do not apply to selective breeding (same as how they no longer apply to humans)

mmm no. That's pretty much exactly what evolution does through both instances of selection and predation.

Any rain forest pretty much invalidates your statement. Specifically adapted animals for specifically adpated environements, all without "artifical" intervention.

No, evolution only applies to life without artificial intervention, i.e. without a human behind it selecting who shall reproduce and who shall be neutered.

Rainforests are not humans... And oh, just btw, most scholars do not consider outside selection as evolution. Common error, but they are not the same.

No it doesn't. Whales for example have EVOLVED PERMANENT TRAITS as a result of artificial stimulus, so have crows, these traits are as permanent as the rest of their traits, and are actively expressed even in individuals who do NOT encounter the stimulus anymore. So have bats. Whom in cities have begun using lights to navigate and echolocating less. 30 years later, the progeny of those bats removed from cities still have the altered trait expression in their GENETICS, not just their behavior.

Tell me, how does this refere in any way with a human selecting who is gonna breed and who is gonna be neutered? What you are explaining is natural selection modified by certain human-made factors, I am talking about COMPLETE artificial selection. Evolution does not apply to artificial natural selection, whereas it applies to what you described.

Semantics, also complete subject change in a peripheral fashion. The choices made are based on ENCODED CRITERIA shaped by guess what? Right down to glow in the dark neon green kittens. Evolution only fails to apply to where it does not and never has existed. Since even artificial logic is dependent on consequential cascade arrays, guess where the inspiration for those arrays came from? Preferences are determined in part by the innate characteristics of the chooser.

[Nostradamoose]

Xaijin wrote...

Nostradamoose wrote...

Xaijin wrote...

Nostradamoose wrote...

Xaijin wrote...

Nostradamoose wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

PTPR wrote...
There is a significant difference between a border collie and a beagle.

Sure but both animals are indisputably inferior to the animal from which domestic dogs were originally breed. They are not evolved animals in any way, if anything they have devolved in several ways from the original species.

Alright now since I can't reach through the internet and swat you upside the head myself I'll have to ask you to either do it yourself or have someone close by do it.  Assuming you didn't do that I'll carry on anyway.  I hear statements like this all the time and it pisses me off to no end because it usually comes from people who don't know what they're talking about.

Evolution has nothing to do with superiority, evolution is not some means towards an end goal.  By your logic, flies are inferior to humans, therefore flies are not evolved organisms.  Every organism is an evolved organism superiority doesn't enter into it.

Yea? Evolution only takes in consideration the ability to reproduce, not to be the fastest, largest, strongest mother****er around.

Get over it, Beagles were selectively bred to be beagles, they did not really evolved there. The laws of evolution do not apply to selective breeding (same as how they no longer apply to humans)

mmm no. That's pretty much exactly what evolution does through both instances of selection and predation.

Any rain forest pretty much invalidates your statement. Specifically adapted animals for specifically adpated environements, all without "artifical" intervention.

No, evolution only applies to life without artificial intervention, i.e. without a human behind it selecting who shall reproduce and who shall be neutered.

Rainforests are not humans... And oh, just btw, most scholars do not consider outside selection as evolution. Common error, but they are not the same.

No it doesn't. Whales for example have EVOLVED PERMANENT TRAITS as a result of artificial stimulus, so have crows, these traits are as permanent as the rest of their traits, and are actively expressed even in individuals who do NOT encounter the stimulus anymore. So have bats. Whom in cities have begun using lights to navigate and echolocating less. 30 years later, the progeny of those bats removed from cities still have the altered trait expression in their GENETICS, not just their behavior.

Tell me, how does this refere in any way with a human selecting who is gonna breed and who is gonna be neutered? What you are explaining is natural selection modified by certain human-made factors, I am talking about COMPLETE artificial selection. Evolution does not apply to artificial natural selection, whereas it applies to what you described.

Semantics, also complete subject change in a peripheral fashion. The choices made are based on ENCODED CRITERIA shaped by guess what? Right down to glow in the dark neon green kittens. Evolution only fails to apply to where it does not and never has existed. Since even artificial logic is dependent on consequential cascade arrays, guess where the inspiration for those arrays came from? Preferences are determined in part by the innate characteristics of the chooser.

Ok, it's 1 o'clock, english is my second language and you just killed all my will to read that. Dumb it down for poor me. And I just don't see the cascade there... Yea, sure evolution affected man and then man affected some species, but hell, saying that it causes evolution by artificial selection is a stretch...

Again, I might have completely misinterpreted your post due to the language barrier

[Bucky_McLachlan]

DPSSOC Blurted out some total bullsh*t that didn't apply to anything I said

Evolution has nothing to do with superiority, evolution is not some means towards an end goal. By your logic, flies are inferior to humans, therefore flies are not evolved organisms. Every organism is an evolved organism superiority doesn't enter into it.

Evolution does not have anything to do with superiority you're absolutely correct no one said anything about that at all. HOWEVER DIP SH*T WHO PROBABLY JUST READ SOME RICHARD DAWKINS AND THINKS HE KNOWS EVERYTHING, while evolution is not a measurement of an increase in strength or speed in the sort of basic terms we human beings think of these things,  it is a measurement of how successful a species is (when we're talking about success OBVIOUSLY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REPRODUCTION), and how successful it is is due to how the species has adapted to better cope with it's environment.

LETS PUT IT THIS WAY: A male lion that is born without skin and a nervous system isn't going to reproduce. In fact he's never going to reach maturity, most like mommy lion isn't even going to feed him. But his bigger stronger brother has an increased chance of reproductive success because he is the strongest male in his litter, and therefore has better access to food and so forth. Not to mention he's not in danger of becoming a big ball of puss.

Modifié par Bucky_McLachlan, 19 avril 2010 - 05:40 .

[adam_grif]

Ecael wrote...

adam_grif wrote...

Sure is spam in here.

I'm kind of waiting for the moderator to lock the thread...

Ah yes, "moderators".

[abstractwhiz]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Okay guys, let's stop this. Let's all be Jentha and get this topic back ontopic.

Personally, I think Krogan and Drell might also have a larger genetic variance than most other races, because Harbinger says they are also good enough for a Reaper.

Time to let my unfounded speculations run rampant again! 

There is an interesting common factor between the Krogan, Drell and humans. All three royally screwed their home planets over. Humans survived because the Prothean ruins on Mars tipped them off about the Charon mass relay, and they could start colonies. Earth is still a polluted dump according to the Codex though. Drell survived because the Hanar helped them out. And the Krogan survived because they're just that badass.  

Also, the three species vary across a certain spectrum, with humans in the middle. Krogans are big, strong and devastating in combat. Tons of strength and power, and a bit of cunning. Drell are on the other end, not insanely strong, but (if Thane is a reasonable indication) skilled and cunning. Humans seem to fall somewhere in between, with our highly fluid tactics in battle, and a nice balance between power and skill. We also just got lucky - developing space travel just in time to avoid the fate of the Drell, and coming from a relatively benign world (in comparison to Tuchanka, which is basically a planet of monsters) so that we weren't irrationally aggressive like the Krogan.

Maybe a certain propensity for violence interests the Reapers - Harbinger even says "aggression factor useful if controlled". Not sure why they dismissed the Turians then. Perhaps their highly-regimented species is too inflexible for their liking? Presumably they also have other criteria, since he also says they considered quarians because of their cybernetic augmentation, but dismissed them because of their useless immune systems.

I'm reminded of one of the interesting ideas from the novel Blindsight, by Peter Watts. Concisely stated, the idea is that technology implies belligerence. A species develops technological solutions because Nature gave them a raw deal, and so they fight back by controlling it. Someone living on a paradise world (like the ridiculous Avatar planet) would never bother to develop technology beyond some basic stuff. When there's enough stuff for everyone, there's no reason to fight either. 

So in such a universe, the only species who make it out into space are the meanest, most aggressive bastards you can imagine. And in general, the mean ones are smarter than the nice ones, because intelligence gave them an edge in the constant battle in which they evolved. The Na'vi have no real use for calculus, for example. They're not going to build planes when they can just ride birds. And who needs computers and networks when you have a USB coming out of your head? <_<

I advise some caution when thinking about this deeply - if you totally grok it, it'll leave you depressed for a couple of days at least. I seem to recall an interview where the author said that when he worked out this and some related ideas, he fell into a sort of existential funk that he's never gotten out of.  

Anyway, this isn't really a premise in the ME universe, but it's fun to look at it that way. 

[Mir5]

abstractwhiz wrote...

I advise some caution when thinking about this deeply - if you totally grok it, it'll leave you depressed for a couple of days at least. I seem to recall an interview where the author said that when he worked out this and some related ideas, he fell into a sort of existential funk that he's never gotten out of.  

Anyway, this isn't really a premise in the ME universe, but it's fun to look at it that way. 

Always has bugged me that thing. Existential crisis. It's just so stupid and selfish way to approach life. Does it really matter if you are just a dream that part of a great machine made? What does it matter if there is no true choice? What else could one hope to be?
I guess it can stir some primal fear, but people need to learn to understand and control their feelings, call it growing up.

One thing that bugs me about the reapers harvesting an organic species is that they seem to have no  reasonable definition about when a species is uhm, ripe for harvest. And why don't they breed us? If they are interested only in our flesh, why don't they just capture one colony and put them in a totally controlled environment. Just we've done with dogs and many other species on our planet but with non-aesthetic values and better understanding of genetics.
I am starting to think that maybe Reapers are just the laziest known life-form in the universe.

Modifié par Mir5, 20 avril 2010 - 12:55 .

[Mir5]

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...
Evolution does not have anything to do with superiority you're absolutely correct no one said anything about that at all. HOWEVER DIP SH*T WHO PROBABLY JUST READ SOME RICHARD DAWKINS AND THINKS HE KNOWS EVERYTHING, while evolution is not a measurement of an increase in strength or speed in the sort of basic terms we human beings think of these things,  it is a measurement of how successful a species is (when we're talking about success OBVIOUSLY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REPRODUCTION), and how successful it is is due to how the species has adapted to better cope with it's environment.

LETS PUT IT THIS WAY: A male lion that is born without skin and a nervous system isn't going to reproduce. In fact he's never going to reach maturity, most like mommy lion isn't even going to feed him. But his bigger stronger brother has an increased chance of reproductive success because he is the strongest male in his litter, and therefore has better access to food and so forth. Not to mention he's not in danger of becoming a big ball of puss.

Just adding: Evolution is also about chances and mistakes. Something unexpected, what seems chaotic happens. The individual mutates. If the mutation is stronger, it might survive and replace the old model.
And when we talk about superiority, we talk about values, values that are defined by humans. We are not exactly the ultimate thinkers, we make mistakes. Assume that our view on superiority can be limited.

Btw, to some previous topics, what they called "artifical selection" is no more artificial than a species dying to a overgrown predator population. It's both sad and funny when humans try to separate themselves as something that is not part of nature.

Modifié par Mir5, 20 avril 2010 - 01:00 .