Human Variations and Adaptations

1)  In high-altitude environments, there are multiple threats toward the health of humans, one of which being the unpredictable, extreme weather conditions that occur at high altitudes.  Whether it is blazing hot or below freezing, it is usually accompanied by fierce winds, which drive down the humidity and increase the chances for human dehydration.  Additionally, the air pressure is 30% lower at higher altitude, meaning it is more difficult to breathe in oxygen as the molecules are more spread apart.  Both of these factors disturb homeostasis in humans and this environment proves to be difficult for humans to thrive in.

2)  High altitude environments cause humans to exhibit some short term adaptations in response to the low amount of oxygen.  The first of these adaptations is inefficient, yet it is a quick response to a change in environment with low oxygen.  When humans reach an altitude, their bodies respond by an increased heart rate and breathing, resulting in an increase in pulse rate and blood pressure, which is the heart's attempt to pump more oxygen into our bodies.  Next, acclimatization occurs, which is the addition of more blood cells and capillaries, increase in size of the lungs to facilitate oxygen, and increase of vascular network of muscles which enhances the transfer of gases.  Of course, these adaptations are only temporary, and once the stress of high altitude and low oxygen is no longer present, the body returns back to a normal, no-stress functionality.


3)  The benefits of studying the human variation from this perspective across environmental clines are using the research as a tool to show who can survive at high altitudes, and who may come down with altitude sickness.  This research is also useful when determining how humans can survive in these environments or showing us that humans can not stay in these environments for prolonged periods of time (the latter being the case for living in high altitudes).  One way this research can be used in a productive way is to warn others of the possible dangers of climbing to elevated altitudes, and even preventing those who could possibly be in danger in these environments.  Mostly the research on adaptations can show us how humans react to different situations and environments, leaving no room for unpredictability.

4)  There is not exactly a way to use race to explain the miraculous adaptations humans undergo when presented in a high altitude environment.  This is most likely due to the fact that the adaptations presented above do not particularly happen in a select majority of races, but rather all humans show these adaptations.  However, a better way to understand human variation is to look at the environmental influences on adaptations, such as the Tibetan or Nepalese who have been living in high altitudes for generations.  Because of the influence of their environment, this group of people have adapted as shown in their features such as an increased blood flow near the surface of the skin, resulting in a red color.  This is not an observation of race, instead it is a look at how the environment around this particular race has influenced adaptations within a population.

Language Blog Post

Despite the constant regulations and lockdowns being set into action these past couple weeks, my family and I have had no difficulties keeping ourselves entertained, whether its with puzzles, binge-watching new Netflix series, or just plain-old conversation within the comfort of our own living room.  I have noticed that whatever activity is at hand, regardless of what it is, communication is the main component that instigates and adds fluidity to our activities.  When we were assigned to partake in a conversation without any version of a symbolic language, the activities that were at hand became a lot less fluid and a little more robotic.  I decided to try this experiment with my two younger siblings, who both obviously lead the conversation seeing as to the fact I could not physically speak.  My contributions to the conversation were limited strictly to responses, such as nodding my head up or down to give a simple "yes" or "no".  I cursed myself for never taking sign language in high school, which made this experiment difficult and overall lead to nowhere in terms of my communication.  However, my siblings failed to show any signs of indifference toward me, and actually spoke more freely and asked more questions as a result from my silence.  Although they did their best to include me in most conversations, there were times in which I had no choice but to only observe and listen, such as an eruption of a side topic or a joke being told, which  i could respond to only with a laugh.  Nonetheless, there was no doubt about who owned the conversations held throughout the experiment, it was clearly my siblings were were laughing hysterically by the end of the night.  To analyze this experiment in a parallel format, the similarities can be made between two cultures who have different methods of communication.  Although I had a minimal amount of success using a communicative method that uses no symbolic language, there may be cultures that exist today that may be able to use this method very effectively.  However, the results from the experiment shows that the culture with a spoken language may have an easier time communicating complex ideas within their population because our alphabet and speech allows it.  Because of this, it may seem as though the culture with a spoken language share more intelligence amongst themselves than the culture without a spoken language, and this belief may be exhibited through their behavior towards one another.  One example of this that can be seen in recent history is the colonization of our miraculous country, which was stolen from Natives that did not speak in the same tongue as the Europeans who colonized their land.  The Europeans believed they were more intelligent than the Natives because of their lack of knowledge in terms of language, and so they took advantage of them.

The second part of this assignment was evidently more difficult than it lead on to be.  Absence of any physical movement, along with lack of vocal intonations and arm movements made communicating a point more difficult.  My partners, who have switched from my siblings to now both of my parents, were constantly being thrown off by my points being made in my conversation because the lack of emotion and enthusiasm in the way I was communicating was sending mixed signals.  We take for granted our ability to use signs as a form of communication, because without them it is hard to tell what exactly is trying to be communicated in the first place.  This is shown to be true because a lot of information can be found out just by paying attention to someone's body language, such as the kind of mood they're in, what their immediate intentions may be, or even what they may be thinking.  Reading someone's body language is also a major tool when it comes to survival because it could mean the difference between life or death.  When in the wild, and being constantly on the lookout for other predators, it is essential to be able to recognize the dangers posed in front of you and react.  Reading the body language of a predator can give off signals of a potential threat, which can be recognized and escaped from if noticed early enough.  Avoiding predators makes more time to gather resources, which increase a likelihood of reproducing.  An exemplary situation that reading body language is not useful in is when put in front of a pathological liar, who may appear as sincere when telling a lie.  A common method to distinguish liars is to look at their eyes, and see if they lock onto yours or not.  But this can become deceitful once a pathological liar does the same thing.  It goes to show that body language is not always reliable, and as a matter of fact can be used as a tool to deceit others.

Piltdown Blog Post

Over 100 years ago in 1912 scientist and archaeologist Charles Dawson from Sussex, England claimed to have found the "missing link" between mankind and apes.  This discovery was significant in this time period especially due to the fact that the theory of evolution had just been released by Darwin 53 years prior.  Dawson had claimed that he had found part of a human-like skull that resembled a mix between a human and an ape, which was then accepted in good faith from other scientists within his community.  This discovery had shifted the scientific perspective on the whole evolution of humans, because this skull pointed towards evidence that humans had evolved bigger brains before gaining the ability to walk on two legs.  Today, we know that this is not the truth and that it is rather much the opposite.  However, scientists did not have the technology or even the slight offhand suspicion that this skull was a hoax, and therefore it became modern belief that the skull was indeed from a human.

Years later in 1949 Dr. Kenneth Oakley used his dating technology to research the skull, and found shocking evidence that disregarded the skull as evidence immediately.  Oakley had discovered that the skull was only 50,000 years old, which would have made it impossible to be a human skull considering that humans had already evolved into their Homo Sapiens form by that point.  Joined by scientists Joseph Weiner and Wilfrid Le Gros Clark, the three also found that the skull fragments came from two multiple species, a human and an ape (most likely an orangutan).  Not only did these scientists discover the hoax, but they also found the faults within humans as well.  In this scenario, their fault was their faith in humanity, and their lack of upholding a sense of accountability to check the facts on the skull.  However though it was the fault of the scientists who accepted the discovery based off a gut feeling, it is not their fault they had no means to actually test the skull to find its validity.  Nonetheless, the human tendency to have faith in one another negatively affected the scientific process because until the hoax was uncovered, scientists had been thrown off track for years due to the fact they believed something false to be true.

Though the human factor misled scientists for years, the fraud was brought to light due to a positive aspect of the scientific process.  Dr. Oakley had access to newer technologies that would allow him to check the facts for himself, which is what he did.  By doing so, he found many differences between the Piltdown Man and a human skull, which disproved a theory that had not been previously been fact checked.  Because of Oakley's intuition and gut feeling, he was raised to action to find if the skull really did point to evidence that brains evolved before the ability to walk on both legs.  The example of a positive result that comes from the existence of a human factor in science was this discovery in general.  If it was not for the human factor, this mess would have never been created.  But furthermore, the mess never would have been fixed either.  Because of this, I would argue it is necessary for the human factor to play a role in science.

On that day in 1949 when the hoax was uncovered, a valuable lesson was taught to the entirety of the scientific community: don't ever believe something based on a gut feeling; only rely on fact and fact only.  Because of the scientists to neglect that mindset, Dawson was able to get away with fooling the general community into believing that the skull pointed towards new evidence on human evolution.  Even though it would have been difficult to check for facts in this situation, there's no doubt that it should not have been accepted without question.

Analogy and Homology Blog Post

1) a.The flipper of a dolphin and the arm of a monkey both show a formality of homologous structures of their forelimbs.  A dolphin's fin, however, obviously serves a much different purpose than the arm of a monkey.  Dolphins possess a flipper because in an aquatic environment, their flippers can help them navigate through the water and control their speed.  A monkey's arm, however, is advantageous because they live in an environment with a variety of trees and branches.  Monkeys usually inhabit tropical rainforests, or environments largely covered by trees.  They are able to thrive in these environments because their traits allow them to have an advantage.
b. Monkeys have slender, long rms that allow them to grasp tightly to tree branches and move quickly if they need to make an escape from any predators.  Another interesting feature about the monkey's arm structure is that, like humans, the ulna and radius are able to rotate, allowing them to face their palms up and down.  This structure in monkeys allows them to hang from branches, peel fruit, and even groom other monkeys.  However, dolphins have no palms or hands for that matter.  Dolphins have pectoral fins, which are the only fins that have bones in them.  These bones show similarities to bones found in the monkey arm, wrist, and even hand.  These fins help the dolphins stop and turn, sort of like balancing planes.  In both the dolphin flipper and the monkey arm, there is a humerus, radius and ulna, metacarpals and phalanges.  The structure, though a little distorted, appears almost identical to each other.
c. The ancestor between these two species may have existed over 50 million years ago.  Chances are this mammal was terrestrial and required having this bone structure in order to thrive in its environment.  The bones within the arm such as the rotating ulna and radius were advantageous as well because it may have helped the ancestor hunt, as it was probably an omnivore.
d.


2) a. Two different species that share an analogous trait are the platypus and the duck.  Both of these species have a bill which helps them thrive in an aquatic environment.  Another similarity is their webbed feet, which also gives them an advantage in their environment.  While the platypus is a mammal, it had evolved long after birds and mammals diverged on their evolutionary path.  It was only a matter of time that platypus and ducks evolved similarly after moving back to land from water.
b. The platypus' duck bill acts as more of a snout, and is used to pick up small insects from the bottom of lakes or streams.  The significance of their bills is its similarity to the bill of a duck, which serves the same purposes as the bill of a platypus.  Both species live on land, but thrive near a body of water such as a pond or lake, which may have drove their convergent evolution.  They use their bills to gather food, and filter out excessive water or inedible objects.
c.  Studies show that mammals split from their bird and reptile brothers somewhere around 280 million years ago, then 80 million years after that the egg-laying mammals split from normal mammals.  So, this proves that platypus had evolved independently, apart from any lineage that belonged to ducks.  This also proves that these traits are analogous.
d.