Thursday,
October 28, 2010
2:06 PM
Once upon a time
there were many nations, some if not most, were democracies, others were
communists and others socialist nation states.
Others were just
pure dictatorships tending to be one or the other of the above social systems.
To be continued.
The
end of United States of America and all its Allies as unique Democratic Nation
States and leaders of this World.
Year
2047, October 21-27: last War World Third.
Plot
Human history.
The Human Race
evolved few hundreds thousands years ago and ended in the year After Christ was born, year One (1)
of the first Century and ending on 2047, October 21-27 with the human
civilization-technological adventures.
…with a world
holocaust.
Dinosaurs were the
first large animals that ended in a holocaust of which there were no vestige
left of how and why they died. It was
Climate Change that killed them all at once …but humans, the so-call Homo
sapiens sapient, destroyed themselves with their inventions and discoveries:
the NUCLEAR BOMB.
Hope this prelude
would be good enough for you to comprehend what humans did.
Human evolution.
Animals
on Plannet Earth, earthly animals.
Animals
and food: Animal needs: Variety of animal with its center part, as others and
humans.
Myths,
Religions, System of Governments and Human behaviors, Human needs, Human
Psychology.
Work
on this, just to present animal movement on Plannet Earth.
Protocol
Underworld
Assyrian
Agricultural societies
Feudal societies
Monarchs
Kings
Empires
Deities
Gods
Gods
Roman society
Dictatorship
Colonizer
Conquerors
Communists
Socialists
Free world
Deaths and myths
Latino
Spaniards
Anglos
Saxon
Celts
Legends
Dialogue
Nonsensical
Religious
Ethic
Things
Reason
Death
Sex
Infinite
Athens
Who
are us
Reasoning
evolved in Humans since it turned from its basic root: Hominids (great apes)
into Homo.
Like
this: Hominoidea mutated into two (2) different groups: Hominidae and
Hylobatidae did not create any subfamily and then tribes. The one of Hominidae had further mutants,
they were: the subfamily of Homininae and a different one, the subfamily of
Ponginae.
Thought
around millions of years those family had further mutations: the Homininae, it
mutated and gave rise to two (tribes), the Hominini tribe and the Gorillini
tribe. Natural selection, created by the
environment, since the first prokaryotes, via mutations created out of the
Hominini two genus: The Homo genus and the Pan genus. Notice that the family branch of the
Hominidae, the Ponginae, did not develop via natural selection on mutations,
into a tribe, it went into the pongo genus …a tribe is a group of homogeneous
type of animals that associate amongst themselves in order to storage and/or
share food, protection and shelter.
Those Hominoidea that mutated onto Hominidae to Homininae then to
Hominini and finally into Homo, by logic had to be much more abundance in
population than any other group that went from Homininae into Gorillini tribe
that ended into the Gorilla which were much abundant than the Hominoidea
superfamily via natural selection, and still existed at the same time, this is,
those that mutated and were better fittest for survival thanks to the
recombination of their Dioxide Ribonucleic Acids (DNA), the Hominidae. The least fitted became the Hylobatidae
family ending in four (?) genera of genus that could not survive the
environment on the time. Notice that
those that better fitted to the environment, had a larger brain size than any
of their antecedent Hominoidea …brain activity developed which in turn created
much brain neurons in the brain cavity due to the chosen environment, those of
which their brain mutated (by accident), were capable to live in the changing
environment at a better position than those that did not. So, survival of the fittest gave advantages
for the ones with more neurons to adapt and reproduce, so to control resources
on their advantageous needs and use, and controlling the ones with least brain
neuron: differing in survival of the fittest.
Brute
wild strength was substituted by increasingly brain ability into slowly
acquired reasoning via DNA recombination; this adapted Hominini descendants of
the Homo tribes to grow in larger population with larger brain size, and
therefore large tribes in reference to its members resulting in better
protection against environmental hazards and natural phenomena, turning the
Hominini Homo weaker but smarter than The Pan genus and still the Gorilla and
the Pongo genus. This is, survival of
the fittest at work. So, their brains
developed slightly different, it varied due to adaptation: Known Homo brain
seen from underneath.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pongidae
different frontal pole in Homo than in Pan,
Gorilla and Pongo; their olfactory track: in Homo’s shortened while the length
of the olfactory track of the Pan, Gorilla and Pongo were a little larger,
which could be deducted by seen the shape of their faces, it shortened
less. This created different head
structure in different tribes. It is not
known if these tribes mixed, this is, if they interbreed; but if we compare
actual skulls from the Mongol of Asia against skulls of Western people (actual
human heads) will notice the following: differs in the roundness of the face
when view in its natural alive shape.
|
Pongids
|
|
Mode
of locomotion
|
|
|
|
|
Back
of the skull
|
Under
the skull
|
Average
brain capacity
|
|
1700
cc
|
Skull
(viewed from top)
|
pear-shaped
|
ovoid
|
Widest
part of skull viewed from behind
|
Parietal
region
|
Base
of the skull(near the auditory region)
|
Palate
|
Rectangular
|
Parabolic
|
Body
Growth
|
Fast
|
Slow
|
|
|
Curved
|
Straight
|
The
Mongol people skull’s is widest from the parietal region than the Western skull
that is wider at its base (near the auditory region). This differentiation is much clear between
Pongids and Humans skulls as noticed above “Distinction to hominins”. Meaning this: Homininae and Ponginae were not
yet different species but a variety one from the other on the steps of
evolution toward acquiring different set of DNA strands via natural selection
in process due to different environment through millions of years. As the environment changed, so did their
brain bio. Those Hominidae Homininae
kept differing from the Hominidae Ponginae until converting into different
genus of the same species and further into different variety: the
Australopithecine that include the Australopithecus and Paranthropus genera as
well as the Kenyanthropus, Ardipithecus and Praeanthropus (related species)
very close relative of the Hominini.
Australopithecines:
Homo ("humans")
↓
|
|
|
|
|
Kingdom:
|
|
Phylum:
|
|
Class:
|
|
Order:
|
|
Suborder:
|
|
Infraorder:
|
|
Family:
|
|
Subfamily:
|
|
Tribe:
|
|
Genus:
|
Homo
|
|
|
|
|
Linnaeus, 1758
|
|
|
|
|
|
other species or subspecies
suggested
|
|
|
|
|
- Africanthropus Dreyer, 1935
- Atlanthropus Arambourg, 1954
- Cyphanthropus Pycraft, 1928
- Pithecanthropus Dubois, 1894
- Protanthropus Haeckel, 1895
- Sinanthropus Black, 1927
- Tchadanthropus Coppens, 1965
- Telanthropus Broom & Anderson 1949
|
|
↓
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From
<https://d.docs.live.net/ec8ee9b1503b6ac6/MyWorkspace%20Editing%20Room-MyEspacioDeTrabajo%20Cuarto%20de%20Edición/Animals%20on%20Plannet%20Earth%5e.docx>
Origin
of Life:
New
research shows that the close linkage between the physical properties of amino
acids, the genetic code, and protein folding was likely the key factor in the
evolution from building blocks to organisms in Earth's primordial soup. Credit:
Gerald Prins
In the beginning, there were simple chemicals. And they
produced amino acids that eventually became the proteins necessary to create
single cells. And the single cells became plants and animals. Recent research
is revealing how the primordial soup created the amino acid building blocks,
and there is widespread scientific consensus on the evolution from the first
cell into plants and animals. But it's still a mystery how the building blocks
were first assembled into the proteins that formed the machinery of all cells.
Now, two long-time University of North Carolina scientists - Richard Wolfenden,
PhD, and Charles Carter, PhD - have shed new light on the transition from
building blocks into life some 4 billion years ago.
"Our work shows that the close linkage between the
physical properties of
amino acids, the
genetic code,
and protein folding was likely essential from the beginning, long before large,
sophisticated molecules arrived on the scene," said Carter, professor of
biochemistry and biophysics at the UNC School of Medicine. "This close
interaction was likely the key factor in the evolution from building blocks to
organisms."
Their findings, published in companion papers in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
fly in the face of the problematic "RNA world" theory, which posits
that RNA - the molecule that today plays roles in coding, regulating, and
expressing genes - elevated itself from the primordial soup of amino acids and
cosmic chemicals to give rise first to short proteins called peptides and then
to single-celled organisms.
Wolfenden and Carter argue that RNA did not work alone; in
fact, it was no more likely that RNA catalyzed peptide formation than it was
for peptides to catalyze RNA formation.
The finding adds a new layer to the story of how life evolved
billions of years ago.
Its name was LUCA
The scientific community recognizes that 3.6 billion years
ago there existed the last universal common ancestor, or LUCA, of all living
things presently on Earth. It was likely a single-cell organism. It had a few
hundred genes. It already had complete blueprints for DNA replication, protein
synthesis, and RNA transcription. It had all the basic components - such as
lipids - that modern organisms have. From LUCA forward, it's relatively easy to
see how life as we know it evolved.
Before 3.6 billion years, however, there is no hard evidence
about how LUCA arose from a boiling caldron of chemicals that formed on Earth
after the creation of the planet about 4.6 billion years ago. Those chemicals
reacted to form amino acids, which remain the building blocks of proteins in
our own cells today.
"We know a lot about LUCA and we are beginning to learn
about the chemistry that produced
building blocks like amino
acids, but between the two there is a desert of knowledge," Carter said.
"We haven't even known how to explore it."
The UNC research represents an outpost in that desert.
"Dr. Wolfenden established physical properties of the
twenty amino acids, and we have found a link between those properties and the
genetic code," Carter said. "That link suggests to us that there was
a second, earlier code that made possible the peptide-RNA interactions
necessary to launch a selection process that we can envision creating the first
life on Earth."
Thus, Carter said, RNA did not have to invent itself from the
primordial soup. Instead,
even before there were cells, it seems more likely that there were interactions
between amino acids and nucleotides that led to the co-creation of proteins and
RNA.
Complexity from simplicity
Proteins must fold in specific ways to function properly. The
first PNAS paper, led by Wolfenden, shows that both the polarities of the
twenty amino acids (how they distribute between water and oil) and their sizes
help explain the complex process of protein folding - when a chain of connected
amino acids arranges itself to form a particular 3-dimensional structure that
has a specific biological function.
"Our experiments show how the polarities of amino acids
change consistently across a wide range of temperatures in ways that would not
disrupt the basic relationships between genetic coding and
protein folding," said
Wolfenden, Alumni Distinguished Professor of Biochemistry and Biophysics. This
was important to establish because when life was first forming on Earth,
temperatures were hot, probably much hotter than they are now or when the first
plants and animals were established.
A series of biochemical experiments with amino acids
conducted in Wolfenden's lab showed that two properties - the sizes as well as
the polarities of amino acids - were necessary and sufficient to explain how
the amino acids behaved in folded proteins and that these relationships also
held at the higher temperatures of Earth 4 billion years ago.
The second PNAS paper, led by Carter, delves into how enzymes
called aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases recognized transfer ribonucleic acid, or
tRNA. Those enzymes translate the genetic code.
"Think of tRNA as an adapter," Carter said.
"One end of the adapter carries a particular amino acid; the other end
reads the genetic blueprint for that amino acid in messenger RNA. Each
synthetase matches one of the twenty amino acids with its own adapter so that
the genetic blueprint in messenger RNA faithfully makes the correct
protein every time."
Carter's analysis shows that the two different ends of the
L-shaped tRNA molecule contained independent codes or rules that specify which
amino acid to select. The end of tRNA that carried the amino acid sorted amino
acids specifically according to size.
The other end of the L-shaped tRNA molecule is called the
tRNA anticodon. It reads codons, which are sequences of three RNA nucleotides
in genetic messages that select amino acids according to polarity.
Wolfenden and Carter's findings imply that the relationships
between tRNA and the physical properties of the
amino acids - their sizes and
polarities - were crucial during the Earth's primordial era. In light of
Carter's previous work with very small active cores of tRNA synthetases called
Urzymes, it now seems likely that selection by size preceded selection
according to polarity. This ordered selection meant that the earliest proteins
did not necessarily fold into unique shapes, and that their unique structures
evolved later.
Carter said, "Translating the genetic code is the nexus
connecting pre-biotic chemistry to biology."
He and Wolfenden believe that the intermediate stage of
genetic coding can help resolve two paradoxes: how complexity arose from
simplicity, and how life divided the labor between two very different kinds of
polymers: proteins and nucleic acids.
"The fact that genetic coding developed in two
successive stages - the first of which was relatively simple - may be one
reason why life was able to emerge while the earth was still quite young,"
Wolfenden noted.
An earlier code, which enabled the earliest coded peptides to
bind RNA, may have furnished a decisive selective advantage. And this primitive
system could then undergo a natural selection process, thereby launching a new
and more biological form of evolution.
"The collaboration between RNA and peptides was likely
necessary for the spontaneous emergence of complexity," Carter added.
"In our view, it was a peptide-RNA world, not an RNA-only world."
