1. Heat is an environmental stress that negatively impacts human survival. One specific way it disturbs homeostasis is by dehydrating someone. When the body does not get enough water it dehydrates and causes a body to collapse.
2. One way we fight off heat is through sweating to cool down our bodies, which is a short term adaptation, but if we do not replenish our water loss, we become dehydrated. A developmental adaptation would be a persons skin color: If a person has lighter skin, then they burn and dehydrate faster while a person with darker skin is more likely to be okay in the heat. A cultural adaptation would be to wear clothing that is appropriate towards the weather such as shorts, tank tops, sandals, and hats to protect people from heat. A facultative adaptation is human skin pigmentation such as tanning and darkening of the skin color.
3. The benefits of studying human variation would be to help other cultures and people learn about preventing things such as dehydration or sun burns or anything having to do with heat. When a person explores a different habitat, they can take ideas and return them to their community to help others. For example, if people in Africa survive through the heat and sun light yet people in California cannot adapt well to the heat it is best if they learn what Africans do to survive the heat.
4. Race could be used to understand the variations of adaptations because different races do different things to adapt to their environment. Environmental influences on adaptations is a better way to understand race rather then judging a person by their skin color. For example a person could have a black skin tone yet not be African necessarily.
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
Language Blog
Part 1:
This experiment was way too difficult for me to do. I had tried to communicate with my coworker Gabby, yet I feel as though it did not go anywhere. I had no idea how to communicate without writing or drawing. I mainly pointed and shrugged my shoulders. I feel like many of the questions were asked by the person I was communicating with and I could only shake my head yes or no. My partners did not alter their way of communication and I feel it was as though they were used to communicating the way they were communicating with me so they did not change it. I feel that if we were from two different cultures and their culture was used to silent communication they would have the advantage because they would be comfortable conversing with no words because that is how they grew up communicating. The speaking culture would most likely find the non speaking culture weird and many would not even want to communicate with the non speaking culture because that is not the normal way of communicating they are used to and grew up with.
Part 2:
This experiment was difficult for me but not as much as the first one. I communicated with my mom and it was interesting because like my mom, I use my hands and gestures to communicate all the time. I was able to last the whole time, yet I really had to think before I was going to reply and concentrate on not making gestures. My mom was laughing the whole time because she knew how I use gestures to talk just like her. She did not become affected at all because she was not restricted from using gestures like I was. The only way that changed was at the end when she used less gestures then when she began. I refrained from asking questions that had to do with size or shape because I became frustrated. This experiment showed how much we rely on using gestures to get our point across in a conversation- mostly in a conversation that is dealing with specific events or measures that need to be acted out. I feel there are people who find it difficult to read body language because I have friends who do not understand some gestures I make to talk and some even take it the wrong way. An environment that would benefit using no body languages would be a hunting environment where they have to stand still as to not provoke and be detected by prey.
This experiment was way too difficult for me to do. I had tried to communicate with my coworker Gabby, yet I feel as though it did not go anywhere. I had no idea how to communicate without writing or drawing. I mainly pointed and shrugged my shoulders. I feel like many of the questions were asked by the person I was communicating with and I could only shake my head yes or no. My partners did not alter their way of communication and I feel it was as though they were used to communicating the way they were communicating with me so they did not change it. I feel that if we were from two different cultures and their culture was used to silent communication they would have the advantage because they would be comfortable conversing with no words because that is how they grew up communicating. The speaking culture would most likely find the non speaking culture weird and many would not even want to communicate with the non speaking culture because that is not the normal way of communicating they are used to and grew up with.
Part 2:
This experiment was difficult for me but not as much as the first one. I communicated with my mom and it was interesting because like my mom, I use my hands and gestures to communicate all the time. I was able to last the whole time, yet I really had to think before I was going to reply and concentrate on not making gestures. My mom was laughing the whole time because she knew how I use gestures to talk just like her. She did not become affected at all because she was not restricted from using gestures like I was. The only way that changed was at the end when she used less gestures then when she began. I refrained from asking questions that had to do with size or shape because I became frustrated. This experiment showed how much we rely on using gestures to get our point across in a conversation- mostly in a conversation that is dealing with specific events or measures that need to be acted out. I feel there are people who find it difficult to read body language because I have friends who do not understand some gestures I make to talk and some even take it the wrong way. An environment that would benefit using no body languages would be a hunting environment where they have to stand still as to not provoke and be detected by prey.
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Piltdown Hoax
1. The Piltdown Hoax occurred in 1912 in Piltdown, East Sussex, England. Charles Dawson claimed to have found a piece of a jaw fossil from an early human and invited Arthur Smith Woodward and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin to excavate with him. Martin Hinton was a student at the time who also joined in the excavation. The hoax was discovered when testing the "fossils" found stains on the teeth and bones along with random carvings. The teeth were also carved down to look like human teeth. The fossils were less than 50,000 years old when tested, proving they could not be a species with ape like features.
2. Human faults that came into play were two things. Firstly, Dawson did not examine the fossils more closely and study them to make sure they were authentic due to lack of technology, if they were actually real and he did not plant them. Secondly, Hinton, who may have planted the fake fossils and were responsible for the whole thing, went along with the hoax and changed scientific history. This changes the scientific process because now people are weary when it comes to believing scientist because they could be hoaxing us again.
3. Positive aspects that were responsible for revealing the skull to be a fraud were new technological tools and processes. Kenneth Oakley ran a series of fluorine tests to accumulate the calcium matter in the teeth to date the fossils. Microscopes and magnifying glasses were used to zoom in on the teeth to reveal that they were filed down to simulate human teeth.
4. I feel it is impossible to remove the human factor from science. Especially when it comes to finding fossils, humans are the ones who are capable of digging them up and examining them. The technology plays an important part in identifying the fossils, but humans put their research together and come to the ultimate conclusion. I would not remove the human from science due to that very reason.
5. I have learned that you cannot judge a book by its cover: you cannot believe something unless you yourself look into it and find out for sure whether or not it is true and pure. I believe that only you as an individual has the ability to sell you on the truth and make you believe in something after you have done all your research.
Another helpful website:
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/science-of-natural-history/the-scientific-process/piltdown-man-hoax/
2. Human faults that came into play were two things. Firstly, Dawson did not examine the fossils more closely and study them to make sure they were authentic due to lack of technology, if they were actually real and he did not plant them. Secondly, Hinton, who may have planted the fake fossils and were responsible for the whole thing, went along with the hoax and changed scientific history. This changes the scientific process because now people are weary when it comes to believing scientist because they could be hoaxing us again.
3. Positive aspects that were responsible for revealing the skull to be a fraud were new technological tools and processes. Kenneth Oakley ran a series of fluorine tests to accumulate the calcium matter in the teeth to date the fossils. Microscopes and magnifying glasses were used to zoom in on the teeth to reveal that they were filed down to simulate human teeth.
4. I feel it is impossible to remove the human factor from science. Especially when it comes to finding fossils, humans are the ones who are capable of digging them up and examining them. The technology plays an important part in identifying the fossils, but humans put their research together and come to the ultimate conclusion. I would not remove the human from science due to that very reason.
5. I have learned that you cannot judge a book by its cover: you cannot believe something unless you yourself look into it and find out for sure whether or not it is true and pure. I believe that only you as an individual has the ability to sell you on the truth and make you believe in something after you have done all your research.
Another helpful website:
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/science-of-natural-history/the-scientific-process/piltdown-man-hoax/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)