Interesting and Humour - page 3750
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Brr... you should read something on the subject. In addition to inheriting genes from parents, mutations also occur. With these mutations on men, nature is more actively experimenting. It wasn't my idea.
So if there are fewer men, there will be more mutations?
Why should there be fewer of them?
Why should there be fewer of them?
So if there are fewer men there will be more mutations?
No. The misunderstanding of what Dimitri said comes from you equating potential (unrealized) diversity with realized diversity.
A man can have billions of combinations in his balls, but only one (in very rare cases two, identical twins) is destined to become the one who hangs the super firewall for 9 months. This one is the realised diversity.
And the delusion of those to whom Dimitri refers is that we are used to consider sperm to be men and eggs to be women.
They're not really men and women, they're the building blocks of a common process. It's a simple way of putting it (for the progers)) ) different sides of the same communication interface.
And as a result of their fusion a new entity is created.
We are used to thinking that there are few eggs and many sperm, hence the male genetic diversity is greater. But this is only true for unrealised diversity. It's not true of the realised ones, there's almost one sperm per egg.
I used to look at old photos from the days when 15 children were the norm.
These pictures often showed who dominated the family in terms of stability and who gave variety. There were photos in which the whole family had one face of Daddy (this is a so to speak stable part of the process), different height, different sexes, but all with one face.
And there were photos of the opposite, with the whole family wearing Mum's face. So in that sense, in terms of diversity of genes, then two people play the game, and the chances are the same for both.
Oh yes, I almost forgot, mutations are a random process, which is not clear what it depends on, if it depends at all.
ZZZY And mutations never stop, a man completely renews all his cells in 7 years, if there were no mutations cancer would be impossible. It's just not clear whether it's a feature or a bug.
I can write, but what's the argument?
Ah... then don't write.
No. The misunderstanding of what Dimitri said comes from you equating potential (unrealized) diversity with realized diversity.
A man can have billions of combinations in his balls, but only one (in very rare cases two, identical twins) is destined to become the one who hangs the super firewall for 9 months. This one is the realised diversity.
And the delusion of those to whom Dimitri refers is that we are used to consider sperm to be men and eggs to be women.
They're not really men and women, they're the building blocks of a common process. It's a simple way of putting it (for the progers)) ) different sides of the same communication interface.
And as a result of their fusion a new entity is created.
We are used to thinking that there are few eggs and many sperm, hence the male genetic diversity is greater. But this is only true for unrealised diversity. It's not true of the realised ones, there's almost one sperm per egg.
I used to look at old photos from the days when 15 children were the norm.
These pictures often showed who dominated the family in terms of stability and who gave variety. There were photos in which the whole family had one face of Daddy (this is a so to speak stable part of the process), different height, different sexes, but all with one face.
And there were photos of the opposite, with the whole family wearing Mum's face. So in that sense, in terms of diversity of genes, then two people play the game, and the chances are the same for both.
Oh I almost forgot, mutations are a random process that doesn't really depend on anything, if at all.
So you're quick to assume that something is wrong? No one has claimed that the male part of the genes determines only the male part.
I am talking about the fact that if you get a female body, the chances of mutation are lower so as not to break the complex reproductive function. If it is a boy, then nature is a freak, various mutations are possible. And then the realities of life will decide which mutations are appropriate and which are not.
...
I almost forgot, mutations are a random process that doesn't know what, if anything, it depends on.
It has long been known that mutation is due to radioactivity. Weak radioactivity is now thought to be good for the body. It stimulates the rejuvenation of cells and the whole body. It has been observed that many Japanese who were exposed to weak radioactivity in 1945 became long-livers.
Ahem)) Well just because you can hammer a nail and build a house with a hammer doesn't mean you should bang your head with it. Mutation is a natural phenomenon - part of the mechanism of evolution.
It has long been known that mutation is due to radioactivity. It is now believed that weak radioactivity is good for the body. It stimulates the rejuvenation of cells and the whole body. It has been observed that many Japanese who were exposed to weak radioactivity in 1945 became long-livers.
Excluding that part of the Japanese who died from these very mutations, or became "short-lived".
The sample is not complete, so no objective conclusion can be drawn from the result.
ZZZ visit the cemetery of NPP satellite town, look at short-lived people and you will be convinced that a) increased mutation does not benefit the organism at all, b) both male and female organisms are equally exposed to mutations.
Women have a mechanism of blood purification that is inaccessible to men for most of their lives, so men live a little less than women. But this is not a mutation (an accidental process by definition), but a quite stationary process of organism's contamination.
Excluding that part of Japanese which died of these very mutations or became "short-lived".
The sample is not complete, so no objective conclusion can be drawn from the result.
ZZZ visit the cemetery of NPP satellite town, look at short-lived people, and you will be convinced that a) increased mutation does not do any good to the organism, b) both male and female organisms are equally exposed to mutations.
Women have a mechanism of blood purification, which is inaccessible to men, because of this men live less than women.