data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/16c94/16c94795855103fce72fb0eae670e52d191e37ab" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7af11/7af11184d665b93e01d47c240622250ef7c6930a" alt="As proof of my courage, I took this picture from the FBI web site and put it here on this post"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/674a2/674a24854c739adf9750dba32a5a2f4a72801039" alt=""
Zach told me to stop writing about him, so no Zach update. (Am I being a little snotty? Yes!)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e783b/e783bfaf8f8beca011d814bca78a5612ca4ce42c" alt=""
The superbowl sucked. Actually the Viking game before the superbowl sucked. Peterson was awesome all year, then he gets the superbowl jitters and starts making mistakes again. He'll grow out of it, no doubt. Brett was surprisingly composed! The Saints were all about taking him out, and, except for the last pass, he managed to stay pretty mistake free. I kind of see this Brett thing as an analogy for me right now. I am a little old to be in grad school doing what I am doing. There are so many young and beautiful kids here and they have no problem out-performing me. But I am here. I am doing my best. But I don't really feel like I am fitting in so well. I didn't feel this way as an undergrad - so I don't know why it is bothering me now. But it would be really easy for these young folks to come in and take me out. Not that they will or anything - but I doubt they know or care how hard it is to be doing this at my age and at this junction in my life. I do plan to make it to the grad student superbowl, however.
It's 6:30 now. I have fallen behind in my sleep quota, and still have some research articles to read tonight, oh, yeah, and a paragraph to write about prenatal development. I can't even begin to tell you all how much fun my prenatal development and Physiological Psychology II classes are! I am starting to tire of the false nature vs nurture dichotomy - but I think that is the point these teachers are trying to make right now. I got an extra credit point for making a good point on my paper. Here is what got me the point:
Do these articles really show that DNA is not responsible for [environmental] variability? According to Ryan and Vandenberg (2003), "IUP [intra-uterine placement] accounts for a large amount of variability that is not genetic in origin" (p. 674). It is possible, however, that the genome is designed in such a way that environment must play a part in the development of the organism. The genome may be an "if - then" mechanism that requires input from the fetal environment to do its job. With this type of mechanism, some genes are turned on and off in response to environmental factors. This epigenetic code might be passed on to future generations; however, it would seem more likely that each generation would develop its own epigenetic expressions in order to survive in their environment. Does the epigenetic expression of characteristics override the genome, or is the genome programmed for environmentally guided epigenetic expression of characteristics? The growing body of evidence is showing that all life on this planet, and the environment it shares, plays a significant role in the expression of adaptive characteristics. Perhaps genes are not necessarily goal directed for reproduction, but instructions that allow organisms and species to adapt in an ever changing environment.
I was tired when I wrote that the first time. I am even more tired now. I really hope it makes as much sense as I intended. Well, it got and extra point!
Good job writing a new post! It sounds like you are pretty busy! Well I'm excited to see you this weekend
ReplyDelete