The results are in

#76
#76
Septic said:
Please do, I'll come sit at your kiddie table while you pull out some construction paper to draw on out of your Transformers backpack.
Click to expand...
I was wondering if construction paper would help you better conceptualize the topic at hand.

We will start off easy:
stickyshapes1.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matt2496, marcusluvsvols, Obsessed and 2 others
#79
#79
McDad said:
Did you see the new video from Boston Dynamics?
Those geniuses need to rewatch Terminator and check themselves!
Click to expand...

Yep I’m not gonna lie , that crap is scary . When the eggheads start saying hey we might need to be careful here , Duh you think ? Go ahead create an AI with no feelings an it’s only goal is to complete the “ mission” see what happens ... smh
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matt2496, NurseGoodVol, marcusluvsvols and 1 other person
#80
#80
marcusluvsvols said:
Me too. My dads dad was haöf cherokee. Guess that makes me 1/8 cherokee if there isnt any more from moms side. My mom and i both have very high, prominent cheek bones. I have naturally dark skin, and thin facial hair. 41 years old and cant grow a beard. Those are all cherokee traits. I have never claimed to be an injun though. The reservation here in NC looks cool though. Want to take my kids there to check out the museum, etc...i have never been there or to the casino. Gambling isnt my thing.
Click to expand...

Thank goodness I took after my dads side of the family and didn't get much if any of the Cherokee from my moms side.
 
#85
#85
0nelilreb said:
Yep I’m not gonna lie , that crap is scary . When the eggheads start saying hey we might need to be careful here , Duh you think ? Go ahead create an AI with no feelings an it’s only goal is to complete the “ mission” see what happens ... smh
Click to expand...
They got them doing parkour and ****
 
#89
#89
I will say, she does herself no real favors with this. She'd have been much better off simply saying her DNA shows NA ancestry from many generations ago and in her view it is not an issue moving forward.

Let Donald pounce, then say she is prepared to release the report as soon as he releases his long-promised tax returns. She'd have gotten a lot more mileage. This all just looks goofy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb
#90
#90
McDad said:
Bruh, you need to review Punnett square.
Click to expand...

Punnett square is a guide, but is not the end all be all of genetic inheritance. My apologizes if I.was incorrect in my wording of a very complex issue in a simple form, the fact still remains. Just because a person has natice american ancestory doesnt mean that they, themselves have any native american games at all.

What genetics researchers wanted to understand was the relationship between the “factors” for a trait passed on from parents and the trait as observed in offspring. Punnett explained it as a problem of trying to identify the traits of gametes while only being able to observe the traits of zygotes. Gametes are sex cells such as sperm and eggs that only contain half of the “factors” or genes for trait that a zygote (full organism) contains. Gametes do not have observable traits because they remain single cells and there was no genetic sequencing in 1905. Punnett and Bateson knew that in sexual reproduction both parents contribute a gamete to the offspring, but some of their traits disappeared in one generation only to reappear in a later generation. Sometimes new traits appeared that were not observable in either parent. How could this be explained?
The first Punnett Square appeared in Mendelism described as a “chessboard”; they only took on Punnett’s name several decades later. What the chessboard allowed Punnett and Bateson to do was to predict what proportion of offspring would inherit a potential trait from their parents. When they bred generations of organisms they could then check the observed traits against their mathematical predictions.
Their experiments suggested that many traits are controlled by more than two “factors” and thus Punnett squares allowed them to keep track of complex combinations of ‘factors’ leading to different traits in offspring. Mendel’s experiments explained the inheritance of simple either/or traits fairly well but did not account for traits in which there were more possible options.
In its simplest form a Punnett square presumes that each trait is inherited separately; in fact we know this is not the case and so did Punnett and Bateson. (Some genes for specific traits are on the same chromosome and therefore usually inherited together.) Despite this, a Punnett square is still a useful tool for visualising the relationship between the traits of parents and the traits of their offspring.

The Punnett Square: predicting the traits of offspring based on the traits of their parents
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#92
#92
lawgator1 said:
I will say, she does herself no real favors with this. She'd have been much better off simply saying her DNA shows NA ancestry from many generations ago and in her view it is not an issue moving forward.

Let Donald pounce, then say she is prepared to release the report as soon as he releases his long-promised tax returns. She'd have gotten a lot more mileage. This all just looks goofy.
Click to expand...

If I were Trump, I’d say let everyone in Congress and Senate release their returns too. Pelosi hasn’t released hers in 30 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, FLVOL_79 and Obsessed
#94
#94
volfannbama said:
Punnett square is a guide, but is not the end all be all of genetic inheritance. My apologizes if I.was incorrect in my wording of a very complex issue in a simple form, the fact still remains. Just because a person has natice american ancestory doesnt mean that they, themselves have any native american games at all.

What genetics researchers wanted to understand was the relationship between the “factors” for a trait passed on from parents and the trait as observed in offspring. Punnett explained it as a problem of trying to identify the traits of gametes while only being able to observe the traits of zygotes. Gametes are sex cells such as sperm and eggs that only contain half of the “factors” or genes for trait that a zygote (full organism) contains. Gametes do not have observable traits because they remain single cells and there was no genetic sequencing in 1905. Punnett and Bateson knew that in sexual reproduction both parents contribute a gamete to the offspring, but some of their traits disappeared in one generation only to reappear in a later generation. Sometimes new traits appeared that were not observable in either parent. How could this be explained?
The first Punnett Square appeared in Mendelism described as a “chessboard”; they only took on Punnett’s name several decades later. What the chessboard allowed Punnett and Bateson to do was to predict what proportion of offspring would inherit a potential trait from their parents. When they bred generations of organisms they could then check the observed traits against their mathematical predictions.
Their experiments suggested that many traits are controlled by more than two “factors” and thus Punnett squares allowed them to keep track of complex combinations of ‘factors’ leading to different traits in offspring. Mendel’s experiments explained the inheritance of simple either/or traits fairly well but did not account for traits in which there were more possible options.
In its simplest form a Punnett square presumes that each trait is inherited separately; in fact we know this is not the case and so did Punnett and Bateson. (Some genes for specific traits are on the same chromosome and therefore usually inherited together.) Despite this, a Punnett square is still a useful tool for visualising the relationship between the traits of parents and the traits of their offspring.

The Punnett Square: predicting the traits of offspring based on the traits of their parents
Click to expand...
It was just a glib, smart alec post.

We're much more laid back over here compared to the FF. 😊
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfannbama
#98
#98
FLVOL_79 said:
No. Its a perfect analogy based on math.

But we can do another one. It is like her hormonal levels having 0.09% testosterone during menopause and she claims to be a man.
Click to expand...

The left is gender fluid.

*until it’s convenient to cause outrage
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL_79
#100
#100
Boston Vol said:


“The analysis of Warren’s DNA was reportedly done by Carlos D. Bustamante, a Stanford University professor, and shows that she had a Native American in her family tree dating back six to 10 generations.”

1/512th Native American, congratulations senator Warren. Does she honestly believe this makes her look better?
Click to expand...

Thought this thread would be about the Auburn game. Dissapoint
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top