Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)

Comments by Gunnar


2. Mecca should become core to measure time zones: scholars

Comment #165730 by Gunnar on April 22, 2008 at 6:56 am

I don't see any reason why the zero meridian could not be moved to Mecca. If a majority of the world's inhabitants wish for it to be so, why should we keep GWT from becoming MWT?

The placement of the zero meridian is a matter of habit, not scientific fact.

4. Sea reptile is biggest on record

Comment #135626 by Gunnar on February 29, 2008 at 6:48 am

For once, I would really like to see a science topic WITHOUT any mention of religion in the comments...

Anyways, praise is due to Dr. Jørn Hurum for his incredible skill in spreading science to the general public. He deserves this discovery, even though I'm sure he'd like it more to find a new tyrannosaurid species.

5. The Encyclopedia of Life, No Bookshelf Required

Comment #134890 by Gunnar on February 28, 2008 at 9:42 am

This might be the most important thing E. O. Wilson has ever initiated, which actually says a lot.

6. The Salamander's Tale

Comment #132446 by Gunnar on February 24, 2008 at 6:54 pm

I love the problematization of species concepts

7. Whale Evolution

Comment #131034 by Gunnar on February 21, 2008 at 6:50 pm

Evolution is not directed towards a goal. Therefore, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A TRANSITIONAL FORM!

Apart from that, this was of course very interesting.

9. BREAK THE SCIENCE BARRIER - Available Now on DVD

Comment #130391 by Gunnar on February 20, 2008 at 1:00 pm

A civilized being should know his or her science as well as he or she should know his or her arts and history.

10. Fleabytes

Comment #130374 by Gunnar on February 20, 2008 at 12:45 pm

What's with this harassment of Siphonapterans?

11. DLD08 - Life: a gene-centric view

Comment #130370 by Gunnar on February 20, 2008 at 12:44 pm

I think the dismissal of environmental factors, as hinted to in this video, is utterly wrong. Information does not exist in itself, but is only valuable when translated into action - not all kinds of cells are for instance capable of reading all kinds of genes. As an analogy, there is no worth in a book if nobody ever reads it.

The most important part of genes are perhaps the sequence in which they are turned on and off. This is, in embryology, mostly controlled by Hox genes, but also by the available nutrients and the physical and chemical factors of the environments. As far as I know, there are no genetical background for older women having more deformed babies.

What makes genes important is that they are the stable forces between generations. Genes stay the same, except for mutations and recombinations, while the environment is forever changing through extended phenotypes, geological forces, astrophysical interference and other factors.

The answer to the nature vs nurture debate is that it is a false premise - nothing in biology is possible if you haven't got both "nature" (the genes) and "nurture" (the environment). I think Lewontin and his fellow gene sceptics wouldn't be so eager to misunderstand if we gene-sentrics were more clear about this fact.

12. Scientists Say Mummies' Lice Show Pre-Columbian Origins

Comment #129837 by Gunnar on February 19, 2008 at 4:06 pm

I think that the occurance of parasites should be used to a larger extent not just in archeology, but in analyzing phylogenies of hosts as well.

13. Holy missing link! Ancient bat flew without 'sonar'

Comment #129835 by Gunnar on February 19, 2008 at 4:04 pm

Clever title, but I wish they'd write a little more about the concrete processes the scientists used to estimate the creature's ability to echolocate.

14. 'Telepathic' Genes Recognize Similarities In Each Other

Comment #116822 by Gunnar on January 27, 2008 at 2:35 pm

I feel that the phrase "Green-beard effect" should be uttered somewhere in this setting

15. Battle of the New Atheism

Comment #2805 by Gunnar on October 23, 2006 at 4:54 pm

- reminded me of the story when Clement Atlee was once asked whether or not he was an agnostic. He replied "I don't know"

Reminded me of a quote (don't know who said it first): I used to be an agnostic but now I'm not so sure.