What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
44 Comments
- Dimensio, on 06/10/2008, -0/+14Do you have any statement of substance to offer?
- schmick, on 06/10/2008, -0/+9Actualy babies have more connections than the same individual as an adult.
We are born with a sort of "template" connections. If we use then, they are kept, if not, it gets unplugged.
That's why ppl who didn't learn to speak by a certain age, the connections allowing the learning of languages are lost forever.
So if you hear somewher "he/she is too little, he/she won't understand"... poke him in the eye. - ripple123, on 06/10/2008, -0/+8Your logic is a bit too simple methinks.
- BaronVonZ, on 06/10/2008, -2/+10The description is inaccurate ... research shows that its the number of connections that matter, not the quality of those connections. That said, this research is not new nor unexpected - my old high school Biology book said the same thing almost 10 years ago.
- Dimensio, on 06/10/2008, -0/+6Declaring that your position is "simple logic" does not qualify as a valid substitute for justifying your assertions with evidence.
- Terri84, on 06/10/2008, -3/+8Was this not just dugg under this article?
http://digg.com/general_sciences/Study_traces_the_ ...
I mean it was only a few hours ago, don't be so lazy. - SemiSarcastic, on 06/10/2008, -0/+4Well...My brain goes up to eleven.
- Dimensio, on 06/10/2008, -0/+4Do you have an actual statement of substance to offer? For example, can you explain the extent of research that you have conducted regarding the subject of evolution?
- d3athr1d3r, on 06/10/2008, -0/+4But here's the ticker ~ the study was conducted by an all woman team of super scientists!!
- inactive, on 07/21/2008, -0/+3Wow, I'm so sorry warrior007, and everyone else, for the dupe. I'm just, myself, finding out about it now. I was trying to submit this article this morning before I left for work, and I must've glanced over it in the dupe checker. Oops.
So, full credit for this sub, again, goes to warrior007. Please consider checking this submission out for him and give him a digg if you liked it.
http://digg.com/general_sciences/Study_traces_the_ ... - Xpletive, on 06/10/2008, -1/+4they say you "live and die by your connections" eh?
- Dimensio, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3Please view this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdI_MmN-Lp4
- matrixbandit, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2I just started watching The Big Bang Theory and you totally sound like the skinny main nerd character. I don't know if that's what you were going for or not but bravo.
- greytfriend, on 06/11/2008, -0/+2That is a very classy response, Arnold. I'm happy to see that the original sub is up to 570 diggs as of Tues evening and was also made popular.
- flipdoubt, on 06/15/2008, -0/+2I like Terrance McKenna's take on this subject. For those interested, check out his book, "Food Of The Gods", or go ahead and google "Stoned Ape Theory". Wild stuff.
- luckyguy2000, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1there was no evolution, god created humans 6k years ago!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111111111111111oneoneeleven
- FatLoser, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1woah...
- Dimensio, on 06/13/2008, -0/+1Please justify your assertion.
- schmick, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1yes, but remember that the sodium-potassium bomb that powers every neuron, has no idea of what "quality" is, it just fires or not if it reaches the threshold. The quality of a neural connection is measures on it redundancy, ergo, number of connections. So .. saying quality and number of connections in a neuron aspect is the same.
- JarJar420, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1Yousa brains still using neurons???
- eightyk88, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1quality over quantity
- DontThinkSo, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1Hmm, what's with the zealous feminist undertone? I never really heard before that people thought men were smarter because they had bigger bodies... is this really as big as the article claims?
Interesting read, though. - hiscity, on 06/11/2008, -1/+1There's no evidence that could possibly show "sensory proteins in yeast developed into mammal synapses."
That's the point. Thank you. - gzmask, on 06/10/2008, -0/+0brain is brain
- MacGyver2000, on 06/10/2008, -0/+0You know, you're actually 100% right. Really makes you have to wonder, doesn't it?
- eimlauqons, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1Right the brain evolved in a half billion years. Not even a simple cell could do that. And luck if 24 hour days did not start until the fourth day, how could the days have been 24 hours long, and thus the earth 6000 years old?Direct light only started shining on the earth sometime during the fourth day, meaning days 1-4 were not 24 hours long.
- jasonloop, on 06/10/2008, -1/+0One of the smart guys over at Google got this memo before it was published... so they added "Quality Score" to help improve the evolution of the Google Brain, instead of just making it bigger. Another one of the smart guys over there started creating more connections between the brains services, also very related to this article.
- DjOverEZ, on 06/10/2008, -4/+3Study Traces the Evolution of the Human Brain...
...all the way to its origin: Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ! - JohnSteel, on 06/10/2008, -3/+2http://digg.com/general_sciences Somebody beat you to it. Buried for being a dupe.
- swrostmore, on 06/10/2008, -3/+2deja vu
- jimmick, on 06/10/2008, -3/+2http://digg.com/general_sciences/Study_traces_the_ ...
Dupe. - iJustin, on 06/10/2008, -2/+0Tonights top headlines; scientist are lead to believe that the rising cause of teenage pregnancies are due to the fact that teenage boys have penises.
- beowabbit, on 06/10/2008, -2/+0What is brain?
- nedy78, on 06/10/2008, -2/+0The human head weighs eight pounds......Sorry had to be done.
- PeeEqualsNP, on 06/10/2008, -3/+0I believe he is stating a truth that scientists have most (not all) the evidence they need to show the how of a lot of things. They know a lot of how the brain and body function, but there still remains a lot of "why" questions that science cannot answer. For example, a basic living cell, as you probably know, has the basic parts that you learn about in biology; nucleus, mitochondria, etc. Certain cells have a specific functions that they perform within our body. A good example is messenger RNA (mRNA). Read about it here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messenger_RNA%29. It carries information that is used during protein synthesis. This process can be described in great detail in any biology text book, read that for yourself. Science can tell you exactly what mRNA does, how ribosomes translate the information and the final product of the process. Now the important questions become "why does it do that?", "Why do the ribosomes know how to translate that information?", "How did the nucleotides form the codons for the first mRNA and how did ribosomes figure out how to decode the codons?" "How did they figure out that the 'cap' was needed by the ribosome, did the ribosome tell it?" And only 'mature mRNA' is sent outside the nucleus to be used by the ribosome, but what algorithm did the first nucleus use to figure what constitutes 'mature mRNA'?" and "why the ribosome? was the first ribosome sitting there and the first nucleus tossed out a whole bunch of mRNA and the ribosome said 'hey, i could use that to make proteins' then sent an email to the nucleus saying 'make some more of those kinds of mRNA'.
Scientists are pretty good about figuring stuff out, but until they do these questions exist to be answered. This is just one example of a process that science explains in *great* detail, but still doesn't know absolutely everything about it yet. That's probably what source1984 was trying to say. - dullnation, on 06/10/2008, -5/+2You're regurgitating the article.. doesn't take a scientist to do that...
- xptoast, on 06/10/2008, -4/+1Um...this EXACT article was posted not too long ago as Terri84 pointed out. Bury this dupe please. I don't mind dupes as long as they don't exist within the same day/week. Within a couple of hours however is sort of annoying. Sorry I am just venting. :)
- source1984, on 06/10/2008, -4/+0With evolution touted as practically a fact by some people you'd think the evolution of the brain had been completely mapped out. The reality is that we barely understand the overall picture of why our intelligence is different from that of other species - in evolutionary terms.
Okay, now that we're done with that, let's get onto some real research and find a cure for Alzheimer's. I expect to be dugg down by evolution-obsessed diggers. - alapoet, on 06/09/2008, -10/+6What's really cool and intriguing is the discovery that it's not just the NUMBER of neurons, it's the COMPLEXITY of the neurons you have... which makes sense, once you think about it (there I go, using my neurons again!) :-)
- hiscity, on 06/10/2008, -6/+2Hehe. Luv it when they resort to personal attacks instead of facts. Sweet!
- norestebu, on 06/10/2008, -7/+2Brain
- Tenn0, on 06/10/2008, -5/+0DEVILUTION.
- hiscity, on 06/10/2008, -10/+1Sure D. Simple logic. You can't duplicate the assertion nor go back in time.
- hiscity, on 06/10/2008, -13/+2Intelligence means not getting hoodwinked by blatant and unprovable speculation; such as...
""It is amazing how a process of Darwinian evolution by tinkering and improvement has generated, from a collection of sensory proteins in yeast, the complex synapse of mammals associated with learning and cognition," said Dr Richard Emes, Lecturer in Bioinformatics at Keele University, and joint first author on the paper."
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is