January 21, 2013

From Dan Conine:

Re: Genes thought to affect IQ might not: It would be interesting to see correlations between this work and the work of people studying gene relationships to autism. As I understand it, Autism Spectrum Disorder is affected by a more or less accumulated quantity of defects in genes affecting nerves. I suppose that the reverse could be true for intelligence, where a certain accumulation of genetic conditions contributes to intelligence overall by quantity of those conditions in total, rather than specific genes. In other words, autism would be a critical mass of negative mutations while intelligence is a critical mass of the same genes developed or mutated in positive ways. Below some minimum threshold, I suspect that consciousness fails to germinate.

From Mark McMenamin:

Re: Did a sea monster make an artwork… out of bones?: The case continues to improve. See: McMenamin, M. A. S. 2012. Evidence for a Triassic Kraken: Unusual arrangement of bones at Ichthyosaur State Park in Nevada. 21st Century Science and Technology, v. 24, n. 4, p. 55-58.

From Chris Florides:

Re: Scrub jays found to react to their dead: I have witnessed the same behavior in Australian ravens. Dozens of ravens gathered in trees  surrounding a fig tree where a dead raven was mounted on a pole on top of the fig tree. This was done to stop the ravens eating all the figs - a technique that was 100% successful. The loud screeching went on for ages as more ravens gathered. Not one raven however dared go on the fig tree, let alone steel figs. Some swooped down but made a sharp ascent, just like a fighter jet swoops down to machine gun, or drop a bomb and then sharply ascents…!!! The ravens finally left, never to return to their dead mate or the figs…!!!!
Chris Florides
Adj Assoc Professor
Managing Director/Saturn Biotech Ltd
Chief Executive Officer/Xytogen Ltd
State Agricultural Biotechnology Centre
Murdoch University
Perth 6150
W. Australia

From Justin Cusack:

Re: Could dinosaurs explain why human vision differs from other mammals’?: In the third sentence of the article: "Could dinosaurs have shaped the way mammals see the world?" it states that there were huge fearsome lizards roaming the planet during the mesozoic era; this is false.  I am assuming that the author is referring to dinosaurs, which are a completely different group of animals, with an entirely different physiology and mode of locomotion.  It is quite an insult to science to make a such a glaring mistake, especially considering the fact that the website is called world science... Just calling that to your attention.

(From the editor: Given the context, we felt it was self-evident that the sentence in question employed poetic license. Our writer was attempting to conjure the feeling of a dangerous world as seen through the eyes of early mammals. We apologize to anyone who was misled.)

From Bruce Bennett:

Re: Are people getting dumber?: It could as well be argued that intelligence linked with formerly debilitating genetic illnesses can now be passed on genetically (i.e. a Steven Hawking - like example) - whereas at the time period that Crabtree supposes maximal intelligence, all the IQ in the world would not help a less-than-robust specimen...  I don't see a clear argument for 'genetically getting dumber' by lack of selection process.

I think current IQ scores reflect the society more than any sudden genetic trend :)

From Mark (drm ark 007@g ma il.com)

Re: Einstein's brain gets a new look-over: Looking at the human history, I am impressed with the high incidence of super-smart people, among the Jews. ( Historically, in my opinion, the Japanese and the Germans come under this label too). My question is: Has there ever been any research or studies, preformed with this point in mind ?? Have the findings in Einstein's brain, been found in brain of others??  Has there been any duplications and comparables???

From Michel Labelle:

Re: Einstein's brain gets a new look-over: Einstein is a plagiarist and a fraud.

Please check :

Christopher Jon Bjerknes (Albert Einstein: The Incorrigible Plagiarist)

Philipp Lenard (Albert Einstein und Philipp Lenard: Antipoden im Spannungsfeld von Physik und Zeitgeschichte)

Edmund Whittaker (A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity. Volume II: The Modern Theories)

Jean-Paul Auffray (Einstein et Poincaré: Sur les traces de la relativité)

 Jean Hladik (Comment le jeune et ambitieux Einstein s'est approprié la théorie de la relativité de Poincaré)
Jules Leveugle (La Relativité, Poincaré et Einstein, Planck, Hilbert – Histoire véridique de la Théorie de la Relativité)

Claude Allègre (Lorentz, Poincaré et Einstein, in l'Express November 8, 2004)

Richard Moody (Albert Einstein: Plagiarist of the Century)

 Friedwardt Winterberg (Belated Decision in the Hilbert-Einstein Priority Dispute in Zeitschrift für Naturforschung 2004)

Christian Marchal (The Theory of Relativity, Einstein or Poincaré 4th Alexander Von Humboldt Colloquium in 1995)

Anatoly Logunov (Henri Poincare and Relativity Theory)

From Angel Chiriboga:

Re:  Stray stars may haunt vastness between galaxies: This information is crucial to understand the mass and light delay between galaxies.

That eerie uneven glow is just the tip of an iceberg.

These stars have been flung out of their orbits for billions and billions of years amongst the hundreds of millions of galaxies since the beginning of time. There should be trillions of dead, dying and brilliantly living stars smeared across the universe, corrupting data based on "empty" space between galaxies.

Light is profusely interactive with any mass.

It's a wonder there are people seeing dark matter, and dark energy everywhere, where there may just be whisks of stellar debris.

From J. Bernard Sunderland:

Re: When can a moon harbor life?: The more popular amateur astronomy becomes, the more the word 'moon' is applied to all planetary satellites. Am I wrong in thinking that it only correctly applies to our own Moon? And if it is now an accepted term for other satellites, does that mean that our Moon has no name in English?

From Maruj (mu ntaha ma rooj@gm ail.com)

i just want to say that i love this site and all the updates about recent discoveries and studies in science are simply awesome.....

From Lalitha Chelliah:

I have a theory that may not be controversial  but here we go

I believe that like animals who regulate reproduction according to food availability the population of the world is also regulated by the species;

Like how we are unable to exactly define how animals regulate their reproduction we are currently unable to define how the humanoids regulate reproduction and this is despite the scientific discoveries etc in the reproductive field;

I think the population growth over the last couple of centuries has turned on this phenomena of natural regulation ( like in animals)
So one way of regulation is the increase in homosexuality

There may be others but this is definitely a constructive way of natural population regulation (not control)

Love to know what the rest of the scientific community think (I am not a scientist but a person who deals with the population on a daily basis in the medical field)

- Lalitha Chelliah