Blog Feed

Why i changed my slide, i thought that there was to much on the page because its one point one slide. I thought that i can put the things I like the most on it. I changed my backround soo my images can stand out and look good so people can get the point.

file:///Users/jgarcia/Desktop/Screen%20shot%202010-11-12%20at%208.26.56%20AM.png

file:///Users/jgarcia/Desktop/Screen%20shot%202010-11-12%20at%209.05.47%20AM.png

The reason why i changed the size of the question was to make it pop out.

​Based on what I learned in class and now that I have presented there are minor changes that were made on my part. The color blue where it says " The love within is portrayed in different ways" was changed to the color yellow , since the background is black. This made it easier for the color to be seen and my personal quote to be read. Also, playing around with where the words where was another change because of the fact that on my first slide it seemed like there was a lot of empty space, which attracted people more to that space than to the words on the actual slide. Last, the fact that the words had effects to them made it seem unprofessional. 
(For this the one with the changes is 

This is my updated keynote. Before i had too many pictures spaced out along with many words. I felt as though the pictures were a huge distraction, so i decided to make a collage.

Why changed my slides?
      My first slide was more words and less me. I didn't to bore people with words so I made my slide so it can just get to the main point. In the old slide I tried to balance out my slide using from what presentation Zen said. In my new slide I used ideas from presentation Zen to made it simple trying to make 1 point. I changed the background to make my images and text to stand out more. I spread out all my information so it wouldn't be so crowded.

Altruism In Evolution

Reciprocal altruism is described as when one animal acts for the benefit of another animal and in doing so decreases its own fitness. It is in an organism’s best interest to behave altruistically, because that increases the chances of an organism returning the favor – thus enhancing its chances to pass on it’s genes. This is true in organisms, from humans to vampire bats. Most social organism can benefit from behaving altruistically.

It is the foundation of evolution that organisms have the need to pass on its genes. Without it, we would all go extinct. Friends don’t keep providing favors to another friend, if the other friend never reciprocates, businesses stop providing services to another business if that business is about go to bankrupt. It’s human nature to do what’s in the best interest for you.

Vampire bats also provide an excellent example of altruism amongst organisms. Vampire bats require blood meals every night. Due to the nature of their diet, they begin to deteriorate after merely two days of missing a meal. regularly regurgitate blood and donate it to other members of their group who have failed to feed that night, ensuring they do not starve.

The cliché “nice guys finish last” has been disproven throughout the years. By behaving altruistically, an organism reduces the number of offspring it is likely to produce itself, but boosts the number that other organisms are likely to produce. So why would an organism behave in such a manner? The reason for this behavior is because in the future the giving animal expects to be able to receive that same service in its own time of need. 

 

 

Citations

• Axelrod, R. and Hamilton, W. D., 1981, ‘The Evolution of Cooperation’, Science, 211: 1390-96
• "Biological Altruism." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2003. Web.
• Mesterton-Gibbons, M. a. L. A. D. (1992). "Cooperation Among Unrelated Individuals:  Evolutionary Factors." Quarterly Review of Biology 67(3): 267-281.

Over the years writing has been a tool people would use to communicate with others. Where did writing come from and how does it have an effect on humans now. It started from roman numerals, which were carved in stone they were backwards and interpreted in this way to many who wrote it. [1]. Over time had passed the writing got thicker and started to look very script. By the 5^th century there were capitals, this was a different direction from where it started and added a different style to writing. [2]

During the writing, pictures started to form. They began from the Egyptian hieroglyphics. Many other religions had their own ways of writing and eventually this later led to Cuniform, Chinese pictograms and also Mayan glyphs. [3] People could communicate in their own writing. The only pondering thought left is how was the writing for communication revolutionized over time? The answer  might be that over the years writing is changed in put into different arrangements because it revolutionizes itself. The process of writing is still going on and who knows when it will end. Writing is a form of evolution. [4]

 http://www.textism.com/writing/?id=2 [1]

http://www.atlantisquest.com/evolution.html [2]

http://www.krysstal.com/writing_evolution.html [3]

http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ab33 [4]

Evolution of Obedience

  Think 81 years ago, on the island of Bathurst off the coast of Australia Indigenous Australians hunting and gathering, daily struggling to survive.  As a child you a born into poverty, famine, and danger, dealing with animals and an environment that could take your life.  In your first few years, all you know is your family, your mother, who birthed you, your father who protects you, and your elders who support you, who else would know better how to survive.  Underneath these selection pressures, children who would not obey, would die, so obedience as a trait survived. 

            Other hostile environments in different areas instill obedience to a degree of loyalty, trust and brotherhood.  In war torn areas children are recruited from young to join rebel militia.  They pillage through villages stealing people’s children, killing children who seize to obey.  Obedience is pounded into their mind from young, and if that trait does not sustain, eventually the child will be killed.

            Even as adults in a modern society obedience to authority prospers.  When you disobey the law, you go to jail, loose connections with the world, and are unable to procreate with the opposite sex.  Adults, who don’t obey the “rules” loose their job, loose their house and suffer fines and penalties, which are unpleasant. 

 

Future Questions?

If the government becomes lenient with there laws will that create more disobedient children?

Does being disobedient or rebellious make you more attractable?

 

Citations

Dahlman, Christian. "The Difference between Obedience Assumed and Obedience Accepted." Ratio Juris22.2 (2009): 187-196. Advanced Placement Source. EBSCO. Web. 12 Nov. 2010.

 

Passini, Stefano, and Davide Morselli. "The obedience–disobedience dynamic and the role of responsibility." Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 20.1 (2010): 1-14. Advanced Placement Source. EBSCO. Web. 12 Nov. 2010.

 

Walcott, Damon Muir, Pat Cerundolo, and James C. Beck. "Current analysis of the Tarasoff duty: an evolution towards the limitation of the duty to protect." Behavioral Sciences & the Law 19.3 (2001): 325-343. Advanced Placement Source. EBSCO. Web. 12 Nov. 2010.

I changed my slide because there were too many words on it. I needed to make it simpler, so I did. On the new slide, I took what I thought was the best line from the old slide. Then, I put my name in white to contrast from the red and black theme. Also, I made the words bigger to pop out. 

The reason why I had to changed my slide is because i had to many pictures and words.  But with the new slide it uses a new element but it has the same mine set that it is simply easy to understand stand.  

I changed the design because the other one was over crowded, and had to much. This one is straight to the point.

The evolutionary paths concerning vegetarianism seem to be less a matter of biology as they are an issue of cultural ideals.  Physically, humans have the internal organs, systems and other mechanisms for meat consumption.  However, it has become a growing trend in society to opt out.  Some people today choose not to eat meat because they are morally against mass-market animal slaughter.  Others do it because it goes against religious values or simply because they believe it to be a healthier life choice.  However, it’s hard to go back and pinpoint one specific turning point that “began” vegetarianism. 

            Back in the day (talking thousands of years,) people got sustenance through “hunting and gathering.”  This required a fairly nomadic lifestyle, traveling around to wherever the food source went.  By this process, early man spread across the continents.  The food that was eaten was not always about choice, but more about availability.  If meat was scarce, then less was eaten.  However, it is unlikely that people lived a fully vegetarian lifestyle. 

            Many scientific researchers agree that humanity would not have developed as it did without a meat-laden diet.  According to N. A. Barnicot, “It is virtually certain that diet, as a major component of the human environment, must have exerted evolutionary effects, but researchers still have little good evidence.”  Meat and animal products do contain vital proteins and nutrients humans need, especially fats for brain growth.  Many believe that this is the primary reason our brains grew to what they are today.  Scientists have additionally stated that our teeth would not have formed the way they are if humans were not meant to tear through meat. 

Though it is disputed that animal-product nutrients can be found elsewhere, meat is often the “best” source.  According to Dr. Stephen Byrnes, “Vegetarianism and veganism are neither natural nor healthy diets…and it is not primarily meat-eating which is responsible for the spread of cancers and heart disease.” There is cause for concern with vegans, who are often malnourished in essential vitamins and minerals such as B12 and iron.  People need these to survive and develop, and it is usually not recommended for children to be vegan.  Some argue that the same goes for vegetarianism.    

            Whether or not someone believes vegetarianism is the right step, the idea developed in society as a choice.  Once people learned how to farm and grow their own food, they had more options.  As agriculture grew, so did population size, and with it religion.  Today, vegetarianism is still highly connected with religious values, especially in Buddhism, Jainism and devout Hinduism.  According to Daniel Lazare, “Vegetarianism is most fundamentally about the importance of not taking life other than under the most extreme circumstances.”

            This is not to say someone can’t be a perfectly healthy vegetarian.  In fact, Einstein said, "Nothing will benefit human health and increase chances for survival of life on Earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet."  I just wouldn’t choose it for myself.  The convenience of modern supplements has made it easier to make the switch in a healthier fashion.  However I’d argue that if there suddenly were no more animal products, humanity would be weakened.  Even if I’m wrong and it isn’t evolutionarily disadvantageous to not eat meat, I don’t think it’s advantageous either. 

http://www.diet-and-health.net/Diet/veg_diet.html

 

http://www.biblelife.org/abrams2.htm

 

http://www.theecologist.info/page14.html

 

http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/99legacy/6-14-1999a.html

 

Barnicot, N. A. "Human Nutrition: Evolutionary Perspectives." Integrative Physiological & Behavioral Science 40.2 (2005): 114-117. Advanced Placement Source. EBSCO. Web. 9 Nov. 2010.

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=8&hid=105&sid=097bc83a-1caf-42ca-ac7c-7ad011a0e422%40sessionmgr112&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aqh&AN=24225923#db=aqh&AN=24225923

 

LAZARE, DANIEL. "My Beef With Vegetarianism." Nation 284.5 (2007): 25-29. Advanced Placement Source. EBSCO. Web. 9 Nov. 2010.

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=4&hid=105&sid=097bc83a-1caf-42ca-ac7c-7ad011a0e422%40sessionmgr112&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aqh&AN=23749985

 

I realy didnt CHANGE ANYYTHING

Human Eye

The most commonly used argument against Darwinism and for Intelligent Design is the human eye and it’s complexity. How did the human eye evolve? How does this change the strength of the argument of Intelligent Design as a scientific theory?

There are currently two competing theories as to how life on Earth came about, Darwinism, evolution and natural selection, and Intelligent Design, some great architect creating life. The most promising evidence for Intelligent Design had been the human eye and the argument that the independent pieces (the retina, lens…) had to have come about all at once for organisms to see. However, scientists have a theory as to how the eye evolved, creating a disturbance in the most prominent argument of Intelligent Design.


Diagram of Evolution of the Human Eye

Here’s the theory for the evolution of the eye: the original “eye” was a collection of cells on the skin (that curved inward like an eye socket) that helped organisms to “see” light, helping it to “see” if any other organism was in that direction because of the break in the light that the organism saw. Eventually the amount of light that the cells could detect was narrowed to give organisms better direction. And from this the cells became a retina, which helped the organism see even more clearly. Finally, the eye grew a lens that helped the organism to see even more clearly. We can even see these different stages of eye development in living species today.

And so, due to evidence of the evolution of the human eye, Intelligent Design loses its most promising argument. If there had been any disagreements as to whether Intelligent Design was a scientific theory, we now see that by ripping apart it's best argument it leaves us with a new term for creationism.

For more information on the argument against Intelligent Design see:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/intelligent-design-trial.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10545387/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/change/grand/page05.html

For more information on Evolution pick up Your Inner Fish: A Journey Into the 3.5 Billion Year History of the Human Body- Neil Shuban.

 What is the difference between myth and theory?

 

            This is the question that has been bothering me for the past month.  If the theory of evolution is so troublesome to the school district, why aren’t greek myths?  Is it not true that both Greek myths and the theory of evolution deal with the theme of how life was created? Could they both not potentially influence student views on creation? What makes them so different?

 

            After much research, I have discovered that a myth can be apart of a theory. Myths are stories that are created as an explanation for why certain things exist.  These tales date back to the early history of people.  A theory can be used to explain why myths exist all over the world.  There is actually a theory known as “The Jesus Myth Theory” that poses the idea that Jesus of Nazareth was not a historical person, but a fictional character or mythological archetype created by early Christians.  The idea that Jesus was not real but was a fictitious figure is apart of a larger theory that explains this myth. 

 

            According to Religion Compass, “Myths are prose narratives which, in the society in which they are told, are considered to be truthful accounts of what happened in the remote past.”  Theories serve to explain why these myths are created.  However, myth theories that are taught in school, such as the Greek myth of Zeus, are taught in such a way that makes it obvious that the stories are fictional.

Resources:

Myth & Theory

Jesus Myth Theory

What is Myth?

Questions to Consider:

•What about a theory makes it controversial?

•What other factors separate the theory of myth and the theory of evolution?

My first slide I used aspects of design I learned from presentations zen, such as "One slide, one point", and empty space. 

My second slide I kept the same images and words, but I made the word bigger, and I made the background black to add more contrast.

Less words more pictures to explain me

(Find this image here)

Evolution is a complicated process, but it basically happens like this. When one species separates into two groups and eventually turn into two different species is what is called speciation. As these two groups acquire different traits from each other, they are going through what is called natural selection which they go through in order to adapt so they would be best fit to live in their environment. When these two groups have finally become different species, they have evolved. A perfect example of this is from looking at a certain kind of bird that has two different kinds of traits. One group of this bird lives in the west and is white. The other group of this bird lives in the east and is black. Right now, they are a part of the same species, but since they do not mate with each other and live in different locations, they will eventually become two different species because they will be passing different kinds of traits on to their offspring.

(This image gives an explanation to natural selection. Find it here)

This is what happened with humans and chimps. What I want to know is if humans and chimps evolved from the same species, why did humans become so much smarter than chimps? A long time ago, humans and chimpanzees were the same species. Lets call this species A. It is likely that species A had more chimp like traits than human like traits. Nobody knows for sure, but it is probable that the reason why humans have become so much smarter than chimps is because humans have had more changes in traits from species A than chimps have. It is likely that when species A was separated, the group that evolved into chimps did not move to a highly different environment from where they already lived and the group that became humans moved far away and they were required to have bigger brains in order to survive in their new environment.

Sources:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0831_050831_chimp_genes.html

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c018.html

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-makes-us-human

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/N/natselect.html

I changed my slide because I thought all the words took away from the pictures. So I kept the pictures but added one word to explain what the slide was about.