Colorblindness

What do you mean?
I found the picture via Google.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I got 100%, but not with the first time.
It becomes suprisingly easy when you just click the other word than what is displayed,
so I was cheating and was using negative word recognition instead of colour recognition.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I admit I cheated as well, I just remembered the sequence after a couple of times.
The first time I scored 68%.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

lol I just noticed the image came from a creationist website

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Interesting. I didn't even think of sequencing it. Shows how human brain comes up with creative problem solving.

 

Well, they've got to come from somewhere ...

 

True

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Yep, yours is smarter though. Especially if the sequence was much longer.

 

why is it a guy thing and not a girl thing? Is there an evolutionary reason?

 

Ever get into a disagreement with someone about a colour?
They think it's something else and they argue and argue. Then you finally
say you are colour blind. Then they say nooooooo you are colourblind.
When you know damn well that you aren't.
lol

 

Yes it's X-chromosomal. So if a non-colorblind woman who is a carrier (XnXc) has a child with a non-colorblind man (XnY) the outcomes are as follows:

Non-colorblind girl: XnXn
Non-colorblind carrier girl: XcXn
Non-colorblind boy: XnY
Colorblind boy: XcY
Only boys can be colorblind.

Type 1
So: XnXc x XnY -> XnXn, XcXn, XnY, XcY
Only boys can be colorblind.

Other configurations:

Type 2
XnXn x XcY -> XnXc, XnXc, XnY, XnY
0% colorblind, 100% of girls are carriers.

Type 3
XcXc x XnY -> XcXn, XcXn, XcY, XcY
100% of girls are carrier, 100% boys are colorblind.

Type 4
XnXc x XcY -> XnXc, XcXc, XnY, XcY
50% of boys are colorblind, 50% of girls are colorblind, 50% girls are carrier.

Type 5
XcXc x XcY -> 100% of girls are colorblind, 100% of boys are colorblind.

Type 6
XnXn x XnY -> 0% of girls are colorblind, 0% of boys are colorblind, 0% of girls is carrier


So if we have a thousand of each of these couples and each of these couples would get one child, we would have 6 thousand children.

Couple type 1:
250 XnXn, 250 XnXc, 250 XnY, 250 XcY

Couple type 2:
500 XnXc, 500 XnY

Couple type 3:
500 XnXc, 500 XcY

Couple type 4:
250 XcXc, 250 XnXc, 250 XnY, 250 XcY

Couple type 5:
500 XcXc, 500 XcY

Couple type 6:
500 XnXn, 500 XnY

So we would have out of 6000 children:

750 non-colorblind, non-carrier girls
1500 non-colorblind, carrier girls
750 colorblind girls

1500 non-colorblind boys
1500 colorblind boys

So even though there is a huge and very unrealistically high percentage of Xc-alleles in our hypothetical population, there are still twice as many colorblind boys being born as there are colorblind girls being born.

 

lol wha? I am colorblind..

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

so colorblindness is like hemophilia?

 

Uh yes.. :bawl:

 

Sharp Quattron TV

Does Sharp Quattron TV look different than standard RGB TVs to those of you who are Red/Green colour blind.

 

Is there any move to improve traffic lights?
Seems to me that with LED lights it should be easy to add a white shape in the lights. So Red for example would have a white hexagon outline near the periphery of the light disk.

 

I just read an article in discover that says that female children of color blind ppl are more likely to see better colors than the normal person..it says that color blind ppl have a mutant cone receptor in their eye that causes color blindness, so when they procreate that mutant cone is sometimes transfered into the female offspring and makes ir so the colors that they see are more..

the normal colors have three cones red,green,blue..color blind usually have one of the cones that have been mutated, so the female offspring sometimes inherit the mutant cones causing them to have four cones and see more colors..

i actually looked for the article so i could link it,but couldn't find it..
guess it was only in the print version of the mag for now..