Why are some people much stronger and also much smarter than others?

it's always amusing when non scientist always try to act like scientist.
including individuals that do not have a PhD or a degree for that matter.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Then I urge you to provide proof of your claim.

For instance, how is self-determination "pertaining" to DNA?

My arguement is that a self-determined individual who goes to the gym will be stronger than another individual who is, for example, a newspaper editor. I do not need citation, it is common knowledge.

Therefore I accused you of trolling. Though, please provide proof of your claim.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

well, if you actually did any research,
then you would have realized this post is pointless.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread...-than-others&p=3143662&viewfull=1#post3143662

majority of the individuals on this site are completely ridiculous.

it's always amusing when non scientist always try to act like scientist.
including individuals that do not have a PhD or a degree for that matter
i had enough of this place.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Krash,

Your statements in the post that you linked to include common knowledge about genetics. I agree that genetics play a role in mental and physical abilities or lack of those respectively.

Regarding my statement about self-determination. You have not provided a response.

Let me expand.

Hypothetical example:

Arnold Schwazeneggars (spl?) kid plays with dolls. He is weak but has genetics to be strong.

Ozzy Osbourne's kid gets MS, tourettes, and leukemia. He works out and kicks Arnold's kid's butt.

Please show proof of genetics determining the strength in this scenario.

Also, please provide proof regarding the other 7 bulleted points that I made.

 

again,
if you actually studied anything on genetics,and got deep into it,
your questions or so called points, would already have been answered.
but instead, you rely on propaganda,
or it appears so.

you would find that,
will/determination is a subset of a genetic structure.
the brains thought process is a subset of genetic structure.

there are reasons why a pregnant women is told not to use/do certain things while pregnant.

 

Your arguement is for pre-determination? You do not beleive in free will??

So, your arguement is not genetics. Your answer to why some people are stonger, mentally or physically, is in fate and intelligent design of pre-determination.

Science does not look kindly upon your statement.

 

comical...
here,
try this,

the brains thought process is a subset of genetic structure.
will/determination is a subset of thought process.
therefore
will/determination is a subset of a genetic structure.
will/determination is still a function, the function maybe free will or pre-determination,
who actually knows.

the only thing anyone truly knows is,
they are experiencing consciousness.

 

Actually it's sentience, not consciousness.

Also we don't really know why different people experience pain so differently and subjectively.

Some people apparently do not feel any pain after they are injured while other people can experience very severe and tormenting pain after injury.

 

I hope that in the future we'll all be great.

In the future every one of us could be much stronger and much much smarter and every one of us could achieve greatness and contribute to society.

 

There are a few things that go into it:

Genetic Predisposition
Proper diet
Lack of developmental handicaps
Proper environmental stimulation
Desire, perseverance, and determination
Ability to resist harmful influences

list goes on... essentially, a lot of things factor in. People think genetic manipulation can be used to make "super intelligent" offspring... this simply isn't the case. You can take the most "intelligent" genetics available to make a baby with, and if you put that child in a home where he/she is constantly berated and never given proper nutrition, care and love, nor the chance to explore, learn, experiment, and essentially develop... it will be stunted.

 

Absolutely correct, hit a few points right on the head.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Genetic superiority is easily squandered without proper childhood development.

 

Jesus, I don't know. Just lucky I guess.

 

Perhaps you mean: "We're just lucky I guess."

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Knowing where to get information from is better than thinking that you can know everything. Today anyone who has a computer can find information about anything so with computers everyone is equal where knowledge is found. The problem comes when their are people that manipulate the system and take advantage of others so that they are never found out about.

 

Wherever you go you'll find the same types of people embedded in the forum that you become a member of. You can't get away from ignorance and stupidity.

 

It's easier to ignore those individuals instead of empowering them - it's always easier to stick to the topic than to debate someone who refuses to listen to reason.

 

I never use the royal 'we' in casual conversation. Do you think we're some kind of madman?

 

You said the Royal We...
Which made me think Royal Canterlot voice and Princess Luna...

...

So have a picture of Luna eating an Apple

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Only about 2% of the human DNA is coding DNA. The remaining 98% of the DNA is noncoding and is often referred to as juke genes. Bacteria are the opposite, with bacteria having about 98% coding genes, and 2% junk genes. Since humans are more advanced than bacteria; skill sets, cellular movement toward an increasing ratio of junk genes to coding genes, is the path of evolution. The higher percent of junk is what separates humans from single cells not some random coding genes. The 98% genes were called junk genes to downplay lack of understanding and help maintain the bias of the traditions like random evolution.

The junk genes are not junk at all, but rather they have a key contextual use and should be called contextual genes, with life evolving in the direction of more and better context. The analogy between coding and contextual genes is a box of building blocks (coding genes) give to 100 children. Each child will build something unique to their imagination, with some children making towers, others bridges, some even some making animals, etc. The contextual genes create the context as to how the building blocks will be used. If we alter some of the building blocks in the box, each child may still try to build their unique construct. However, having these odd pieces can impact their art around the edges, or at their its foundation. Some genetic conditions don't have the same impact on all people due to contextual genes.

My best theory is connected to the physical chemical composite of water and DNA, in 3-D space, defining a configurational potential. If we start with the DNA packed into chromosomes, this is at lowest potential due to least water contact. As the DNA unpacks, the potential of the DNA increases, with each unique cell type dialed in at a given potential; quantum racket click. The summation of these building block sculptures, at various quantum potential, creates a hierarchy of potential, with the brain at the top. The brain and its cells having been racketed up, by what is below. A unique building block in or out of context anywhere, can ripple to the top or not.

 

The brain's thought process is affected by genetic complement - nuclear DNA alleles, mtDNA genotype - by the interaction of various of these, by their interaction with the environment, and by other processes. It's not a subset thereof, but affected by it. Other elements include random endogenous and exogenous environmental effects, and of (apparent) randomness. Similarly with will.