Human Variation and Race

A high level of solar radiation is an environmental stress that can negatively impact the survival of humans by disturbing homeostasis.  UVA and UVB radiation are dangerous impacts resulting from sun exposure and can penetrate our skin deep into the dermis layer. Although this sounds dangerous some exposure to sun is healthy, it all has to be done in moderation. The pro of UV rays is that it allows our body to produce Vitamin D.  When our bodies are not exposed to these rays in moderation we can experience, what is called, overexposure the cons of this are: sunburns and damage to our skin which can result in skin cancer. On the opposing side, not enough Vitamin D being produced in the body can cause high blood pressure and skeletal deformities (seen in the pelvis).  Skin cancer and deformities are considered damage to our genetics and in result disturbs our homeostasis and negatively impacts the survival of the human species.

Short-Term Adaptation

Unfortunately humans do not have a short term adaptation to overexposure to solar radiation. In result we will burn without proper protection such as sunscreen.

Facultative Adaptation

A facultative adaptation that we have from UV rays is when our skin tans. The tan color of our skin occurs when we are exposed to these rays and sunlight; our bodies produce a protection in our skin with an increase in melanin.  The increase of melanin in our skin may last for a while, but with reduced exposure to the sun and UV rays there too, will be a reduction in melanin. This is why in the winter months everyone’s complexion is much fairer and in the summer much darker.

Developmental Adaptations

A developmental adaptation that has occurred is the natural color of our skin and the levels of melanin that make our skin color.  People with a low concentration of melanin are seen to be of much lighter complexions with those with a higher concentration are seen to be of a much darker complexion.  This difference is apparent and conclusive as we see individuals from Northern Europe with fair skin, blue eyes, and blonde hair; these individuals do not have a melanin protective barrier and thus will burn much easier. Those who live in much harsher sun exposed conditions such as areas in Africa are seen to have a darker complexion to protect them from the sun for much longer a period. Although these individuals have a longer tolerance, they too will burn if overexposed.

Cultural Adaptations

We as a society have come up with many cultural adaptations for protection from solar radiation.  Some of these include shelters, sunscreen, hats, umbrellas, and clothing.  Because of this our culture has seen a reduction for high levels of melanin needing to be produced in our skin.  Today people of all skin pigmentation are populated around the world due to travel and migration over many years.

The benefit of studying human variation across environmental clines allows us to understand and research the environmental stressors on individuals in certain populations depending on where they are or do over periods of time.  If we were to move individuals from their regular surroundings and what they have adapted to into a new environment, they too ‘overtime’ would adapt to their new surroundings.  An example of how this information from explorations can be useful to help us is how people with fair skin who live in the far north have an advantage if their skin ‘has little shielding pigmentation’.  When there is weak ultraviolet radiation the body will produce less melanin, because of this individuals with dark pigmentation will not be able to produce enough vitamin D in their bodies which can cause rickets disease and osteoporosis.  This information can help us understand the benefits and disadvantages of sun exposure and solar radiation on those with varying skin pigmentation; and also allows us to understand how these variations occurred over time.

I would use race to understand the variation of adaptations by distinguishing where in the world a group of people who have experienced very similar adaptations to stressors and where they have originated.  This will help us understand their ancestral traits and see how these traits may have developed over time.

The study of environmental influences on adaptations is a better way to understand human variation than by the use of race because we can see the how individuals have adapted to fit their environment over time.  This allows us to see patterns within people who are in the same environment or very similar ones.  It also allows us to see how humans can inherit and define our genetics whether it is to need a fair complexion or a darker one. It allows us to see that we are all the same and it is only our adaptations to the environment that is allowing us to define each other as different when we should not.

Language Blog

Part One:
I found this experiment to be somewhat difficult, but not impossible to accomplish a conversation and get a statement across.  I found that the partners of this conversation, found it to be almost exhausting.  It was like playing a game of charades for every sentence and they were loosing their patience. Soon I found them altering their questions to ones that were easier for me to answer. For example; yes and no questions.  It made it easier for me because everyone understands what a head shake up and down or left to right means yes or no.  I think the speaking culture has an advantage over the culture who uses symbolic language. I feel that people, especially in this time and day, are very impatient and don't have the time to spend and concentrate on those who are dependent on symbolic language. When we use our words we can express ourselves quickly.  Individuals who have difficulty communicating with spoken language are those in the deaf communities.  I have learned and appreciated the art of symbolic language using sign language because my sister had taken it just as an elective in high school, and turned out she was really good at it and enjoyed learning it as a second language.  Those who are fluent in sign language can communicate just as fast as those who speak when they are communicating with those who are knowledgable in sign language.  They use a lot of expression in their faces and the force of their hand movements since they do not have the inflection in their voices like those who can speak do.

Part Two:
I found this experiment very difficult; I kept trying to resist laughter as my partners and myself were speaking, one could say, monotonously.  It was confusing because you could not get a good understanding on whether someone was trying to be serious, funny, sarcastic, or was sad.  My partners were not affected because we only did the experiment for 15 minutes, but I believe that if we had to continuous for a much longer time, it could become frustrating to not be able to express yourself.  I think non-speech language techniques in our ability to communicate effectively is very important in our culture. We use it to fully understand what someone is saying, to see what we aren't saying, and to understand underlying sub-conscience feelings.  I know they use people who can read peoples actions to emotions in court rooms, it helps them try and understand if a person may be lying to the court.  Yes I believe people who are not very good in social settings are those who have difficulty reading body language.  The benefit to reading body language is to understand more than what someone is saying, we don't always say what we feel, but sometimes we show it without knowing. It helps us know when we should speak up or bite our tongues.  An environmental condition where there might be a benefit to not reading body language would be in situations in customer service. I have personal experience in this, sometimes customers and people are not the easiest to work with. As a person who is supposed to provide great customer service, you have to work really hard to not express when you are mad or frustrated. I think this would be a great place to not be able to read body language and only the outer happy expression we are supposed to show.

Piltdown Hoax

In the early 1900's (1910-1912) Charles Dawson found 'fossilized' fragments of a skull in Piltdown.  These fossils were supposedly the remains of an unknown species of an extinct hominin to which scientists believed could be a link between humans and primates; and were the oldest dated fossils yet to be discovered.  Later on in the 50's with increased knowledge on dating fossils by scientists it was found that the efforts of Dawson, Aurthur Smith Woodward, Samuel Woodhead, Martin Hinton and, Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin were all a hoax.  The new efforts of scientists to test these bones with chemical tests which proved that the bone fragments had been stained, the teeth on the jaw bone were manipulated and shaved, and the pieces matched those of a female orangutan and were only 600 years old.

These faults that come into play here in this scenario were that these pieces of bone were taken at face value and were not investigated and further researched. If these were further researched when the fossil pieces were first discovered scientists and others would have known that these were phony.  These faults negatively impacted the scientific process by affecting the integrity and honesty that scientists and professionals abide by.  This helped the scientific community build a series of honesty and ethical rules because there were so many phony stories and findings and breaches of truth and findings. Findings of scientists need to be of honest nature and research because other scientists use these findings and research to build upon new findings.

One of the main reasons for revealing the skull to be fraud was because many scientists were skeptical and they have very curious thoughts because there was really no proof so they did their own research to build upon Dawson's findings. Because technology had improved scientists were able to re-date the bones to an earlier time. The process that they used was using a newly available study process that was a fluorine absorption test and discovered that the bones were not over 500,000 years old but around 500-600 years old. Later on they discovered the bones to be a fraud and of different species and stained.

It is not possible to remove the "human" factor from science because it is our minds and thoughts and questions that bring up another ones error, or another thought on a discovery to build upon and find out something new or that was missed. I would not want to remove the aspect of human or human error because it is what keeps science going, without human questioning and curiosity we would not pursue further investigation. Yes there may be faults (on purpose or on accident), but sometimes this leads to new discoveries. This is why scientists follow the scientific method so that they can follow a guide line and save research, evidence, and proof of what they have discovered.

What I can take from this historical event regarding taking information at face value from an unverified source is that you can not always trust what you see at face value. You must investigate on your own, or look at the research. If not everything adds up, look in to it and ask questions. Asking questions is very important because without answers we can be lied to. No one questioned Dawson and didn't do so  until after his death did those in the scientific field start to investigate. If they would have asked questions and investigated early on, Dawson would not have been as prestige and honored as he 'falsely' was.