1. Select only ONE of the following environmental stresses: (a) heat, (b) high levels of solar radiation, (c) cold, or (d) high altitude. Discuss specifically how this environmental stress negatively impacts the survival of humans by disturbing homeostasis. (5 pts)

Cold weather is an environmental stress that negatively impacts the survival of humans by causing loss of movement, loss of breathing, and death. The cold weather also makes us more prone to catch illnesses and germs, which could also lead to death. "Frostbite" can occur in extreme cold and cause the loss of limbs and body parts. This can also lead to death, or cause one to become immobile which would prevent them from gathering food and resources, which also could result in death.



2. Identify 4 ways in which humans have adapted to this stress, choosing one specific adaptation from each of the different types of adaptations listed above (short term, facultative, developmental and cultural). Include images of the adaptations. (5 pts each/ 20 pts total)

Some cultural adaptations humans have developed are clothes, fire, houses



Humans adapted to the cold by creating a way of insulating their body heat and adding extra layers of warmth and protection from the cold by creating clothes. This allowed humans to be able to travel outdoors in cold weather, and hunt for food while staying safe from frostbite. As you can see in this picture, humans are able to easily be outside in even snow and still have a smile on their face because they are able to keep warm. Without extra layers of warmth, it would be very difficult to survive. Now, clothes outside are the social norm among humans.



Another adaptation to the cold is creation of controlled fires. Humans developed a method of creating fire that didn't spread, and would help them stay warm and be close to it. This adaptation also helped with being able to cook food to stay alive in freezing temperatures, and combat frostbite.



Creating a place to stay inside when weather got too cold was also a much needed adaptation so that humans had a place to shelter and not be surrounded by snow or rain and get even more cold. Houses were built to help insulate heat and keep out the rain, snow, and cold. Putting controlled fires into these houses and creating "fireplaces" were also made to make the house warmer and so that humans could sleep in a safe place that was warm.

A developmental adaptation to the cold was the development of body hair. This added an extra layer of warmth and protection to the cold, and was placed in places where the skin was more sensitive (facial,armpit,pubic). There is a small layer of hair all over the body as well to help combat the cold.



A facultative adaptation would be the development of body fat to help combat the cold and retain more body heat in extreme cold. Humans are able to change their body to adapt to the cold climate and survive more succesfully without freezing. If they were thin, they would not survive the cold as well as someone who had more body fat.


A short term adaptation would be when humans get "goosebumps" on their body when they are cold. This is when the hair stands when cold, and it creates a fluffy layer of warmth. This goes away when it's warm. This short term adaptation helps to keep warm in cold environments.







 3. What are the benefits of studying human variation from this perspective across environmental clines? Can information from explorations like this be useful to help us in any way? Offer one example of how this information can be used in a productive way. (5 pts)

The benefits of these studies help show us why humans can be so different in appearance from one another, and find the cause of these variations and differences in a scientific way. When we look at how these differences help groups of humans in different environments in different ways, we can see why these adaptations happened and how they were caused. This information helps us see why people have different skin colors from different areas by seeing how these skin colors and differences in melanin once helped their ancestors survive in their unique environments and climates. Or perhaps why some people have more body hair than others, perhaps their ancestors were from a colder climate and they developed more body hair to stay warm. Or perhaps one's ancestors needed extra protection from UV rays so they developed more melanin.



 4. How would you use race to understand the variation of the adaptations you listed in #2? Explain why the study of environmental influences on adaptations is a better way to understand human variation than by the use of race. (10 pts)

The study of environmental influences is better than the use of race to understand our different variations because it helps to show that it's our environment that causes these variations and that's it. A population of humans of humans who may have more body fat and are shorter than others probably adapted to a cold environment, not because of anything with their race. I feel that this helps show people why we are different, and that if your own ancestors lived in a different climate and had different adaptations than they did, you could look a lot different than you do now. It's all about environment and studying this way helps show is the causes for these changes.

 Thoroughly describe your own experiences and the responses of your partners to the experiment. Did you find this assignment easy or difficult and why? Did your partners alter the way they communicated with you because of your absence of communication? Describe. (5 pts)

This assignment was difficult as I wasn't able to start the conversation or contribute much to it as I couldn't speak. I found I could only shake my head to indicate yes or no, but other than that it was difficult to express my own thought opinions. I did these with my boyfriend and he'd alter the conversation by doing the majority of the talking and asking me yes or no questions. He said after that he felt like he was talking to himself and just saying stories mostly, and wished I could have communicated and interacted more. He also said that he missed the sound of my voice and got a feeling of being lonely without hearing me respond back and wished I could have talked to him. I also wished I could have spoken to be able to communicate my thoughts and initiated new topics.



  Who was in control of the conversation, you or your partner? Who initiated or changed topics? Who asked and who answered questions? If you conducted this experiment with more than one person, were you ever excluded from the conversation? If you think of a conversation as a balance of power between two (or more) individuals, who had the power in this conversation, you or your partner? Explain your answer. (5 pts)

My boyfriend was in charge of the conversation and he was the one to change the topics. He would ask me yes or no questions to which I would shake my head yes or no. I tried to ask him a question using my hand movements but he had no idea what I was trying to say ("how was your day?"). He mostly just talked about his day and told me stories about his new job and I just listened and nodded so he knew I was listening. He had the power in the conversation and it was up to him what the topics were.



 Imagine that you and your partners in the conversation represent two different cultures, one that uses spoken language and one that doesn’t. Which culture has the advantage in communicating complex ideas within their population? What attitudes might the speaking culture have toward the culture that does not use symbolic language? Can you identify any modern situations that mirror or resemble this relationship between a culture that can speak and culture that can’t? (10 pts)


The culture that can communicate by speaking has the advantage of expressing their complex ideas and beliefs. I feel that the speaking culture would be confused as to what the non symbolic speaking culture thinks and believes, and that miscommunication could happen with that language barrier. This immediately reminded me of when I interact with my dogs, and how heavily I rely on their body language and eye contact to tell how they are feeling and what they want. I have a close connection with my dogs and they are good at showing me what they need (such as going outside to use the restroom, grabbing my hand to pet them, or pointing towards a ball to throw it), however I wish they could speak English so I could really know what they were thinking and how they're really feeling. Sometimes my littlest dog will bark but it sounds like hes trying to speak, and it's always because he wants to play fetch. However, once he poked himself in the eye but didn't act any different and still played like normal, and we only realized something was wrong when it got infected. He almost lost his eye from that and I wished he could have told us something was wrong.



Part 2: You were asked to spend 15 minutes communicating without any physical embellishments, i.e., no hand signals, not vocal intonation, not head, facial, or body movements.




 Thoroughly describe your own experiences and the responses of your partners to the experiment. Did you find this assignment easy or difficult and why? How did your partner(s) respond to your lack of body language? Did they have any difficulty understanding you? Describe. (5 pts)


I did this with my boyfriend as well, and since he knew it was for an experiment it wasn't as hard for him, though it was hard to keep a straight face for me. He said if he didn't know it was an experiment he would have thought I was mad at him as he's observed that's what I've done in past when I was upset with him. I thought that was funny and I suppose I do become pretty straight forward and monotone when I get upset. Since he knew I wasn't upset we just talked like normal and I looked at the ground, we just talked about what we're going to do tomorrow and regular things. I think it was easier because he knows me more than anyone and knew I wasn't mad, so he was able to tell how I actually felt though I couldn't express it through my physical language. If I did it with a stranger they probably wouldn't be able to tell how I felt and thought I was uninterested in the conversation.





 What does this experiment say about our use of “signs” in our language, i.e., how important is nonspeech language techniques in our ability to communicate effectively? What type of information do humans receive about the words a person is speaking when they “read” a person’s body language? (5 pts)

We both found that body language is very important as it helps show the context of the words a person is saying and what the meaning is. Without it, it's easy to feel like the person is uninterested in the conversation or perhaps upset. Body language and facial movements help show emotion, and it can be hard to differentiate sarcasm with sincerity.




  Describe the adaptive benefit to possessing the ability to read body language. How might the ability to read body language help a person survive, obtain resources, and reproduce successfully? (5 pts)

It helps to be able to identify a situation and communicate to people who can provide them resources so they can obtain help when they need it. For humans it helps with reproduction as we create some sort of connection through verbal or physical communication to do so. For survival it's important because a person can read another person's body language to assess if a person is dangerous or aggressive.


 Are there people who have difficulty reading body language and can you identify them? Can you describe a situation where there might be a benefit to not reading someone’s body language, i.e., a situation where perhaps body language does not give you reliable information? (5 pts)

A person who is blind cannot see body language and relies on tone of voice to decipher what the person is saying, or anyone talking on the phone. A situation where there is a benefit to not being able to read a person's body language could perhaps be talking on the phone to someone who normally seems pretty open and confident with their body language, but perhaps doesn't actually feel confident and talk to them to communicate more about their feelings rather than observe their body language. I'm actually not sure if that's a benefit or if that would be helpful, it's hard to think of an instance where that's a benefit.

1. 1. Begin by giving a brief synopsis of the Piltdown hoax, including when and where it was found, by whom, its scientific significance (what would it have taught us) and varying effects this had on the scientific community. Also include how the hoax was discovered and the varying responses it received from the scientist(s) involved and in the related fields of human evolution. (10 its)
      
      
      The Piltdown Hoax was in 1912 in a southern English town of Luis in a small village called Piltdown. An amateur Charles Dawson stated he found remains of an ancient human skull, and invited Arthur Woodward, a well known Geologist of England, and French Paleontologist, Father Pierre. Until this moment, fossils of primitive humans had only been found in France, Germany and Asia, and never in England, making this a big moment for these scientists to have discovered the first primitive human fossils in England. They believed the fossils found in England to be the oldest of them all and called it the "Piltdown Man", with a suggested large brain and ape like jaw and human like teeth. However, around the 1930's other early human remains were found that didn't quite match up with this "Piltdown Man",  as these new discoveries suggested that the jaw and teeth became more human-like before the evolution of a larger brain. After more investigation and more extensive testing, carbon-dating technology showed the skull was actually no more than 600 years old. More investigation found it was in fact a human skull and an ape skull manually altered to appear to be from the same skull, and the teeth had been filed down to look more human. The reason this happened is most likely from someone trying to get revenge on either the scientists or science itself, and there are many speculations on who it could have been, however it was most likely someone out for revenge or perhaps one of the three scientists involved who wanted respect as the founder of this "rare" fossil. This teaches us to always further investigate fossils and not look at just what was fond, but to compare it to other things that have been found. Evolution is part of a tree and everything is connected by "branches", and it's important to see where those branches start and connect rather than looking at them individually. This Piltdown man hoax was a huge discovery for the scientific community as it shows how much testing one must do before declaring something to be true, as doing so without proper tests and evidence can lead one to look foolish and make false claims to gain praise, which is not science.
      
      
   2. Scientists are curious, creative and persistent by nature, but being human, they also have faults. What human faults come into play here in this scenario and how did these faults negatively impact the scientific process? (5 its)
      
      The human faults of this situation is the want for praise and status. As humans, it is in our nature to want to be "adored" and have a high status in society. This hoax happened because it was an amazing discovery to find the oldest and first ever primitive human fossil in England, and it was just too easy to lie and make up a story to make it look real and say it's true. This negatively affected the scientific process as tests were not made and no one was trying to falsify it, it was simply said to be true and so people believed it to be true without further evidence, which is not how science works.
      
      
      
   3. What positive aspects of the scientific process were responsible for revealing the skull to be a fraud? Be specific about scientific tools, processes or methodologies that were involved in providing accurate information about the Piltdown skull. (5 its)
      
      
      Falsifiability was a big aspect of revealing what this skull truly was, as scientists thought to check if the skull had possibly been altered when they realized it didn't match up with other discoveries that were supposed to be similar to it. Comparing the skull to others rather than looking at it individually was very important. Scientists used fluorine testing, carbon-dating technology, and a microscope to reveal that this Piltdown man was a fraud.This showed that the skull was in fact much younger than was stated (only 600 years), and close examination showed that the teeth had been grinded down to look human like, with stating to match the mismatched pieces.
      
      
   4. Is it possible to remove the “human” factor from science to reduce the chance of errors like thishappening again? Would you want to remove the human factor from science? (5 its)
      
      
      I believe that human's can and will always end up making errors at some point, but it's humans that do the searching and digging and want to discover. I'm sure robots could one day travel and forage all the land of the earth for fossils and make scientific discoveries that may perhaps be quicker to authenticate, however I don't think taking humans out completely is necessary for accurate answers. I do think that humans must do all testing available and continue testing as new technologies arise to find true "answers" before stating something is true, but I know humans can curate these facts and evidence and continue to discover amazing things (with backed up testing and evidence).
      
      
   5. Life Lesson: What lesson can you take from this historical event regarding taking information at face value from unverified sources? (5 its)
      
      
      I've learned to never believe something to be true until there is correct scientific steps shown to prove it. Deep analysis of every possible part to something is extremely important, and just because something looks real, and important scientists are saying it's real, doesn't mean it is real. Only facts and evidence can prove something to be real, and it's important to not be naive (especially with science) when people of a higher status say something is true, and not go in further investigation.

a. Briefly describe (not just identify) the two different species that possess the homologus trait. (5 pts)

Humans (mammal) and fish both posess tail bones.


b. Describe the homologus trait of each species, focusing on the differences in structure and function of the trait. Why do these homologus traits exhibit differences between the two species? Make sure your explanation is clear and complete. (10 pts)

The homologous trait is the tail bone, both have a tail bone however they do not appear the same and are not used for the same purpose. The tail bone of a human is not used for survival or help with every day activities and is usually left unnoticed without moving, whereas the tailbone of a fish serves a purpose to move side to side and help it swim. Humans are evolved enough to not need the help of a tail so it has "dissapeared" however the bone is still there. Fish live in the water and need it to help swim, so they still have a tail.


c. Who was (generally, not specifically) the common ancestor of these two species and how do you know that ancestor possessed this homologus trait? (5 pts) d. Provide an image of each species in this comparison. (5 pts)

An ancient fish was the common ancestor as the bones it possessed were passed on and changed to become elbows,wrists,etc.,as seen in humans and the tail bone was evolved and some bones changed for evolved fish to better fit the environments.









a. Briefly describe the two different species that possess the analogous trait. (5 pts)

Dolphin (mammal) and Shark (fish)



b. Describe the analogous trait of each species, focusing on the similarities in structure and function of the trait. Clearly explain why these analogous traits exhibit similarities between the two species. (10 pts)

Both are predetory and have fins, they both live in the water and adapted to have fins to help them survive and swim.



c. All pairs of organisms share some common ancestor if you go back far enough in time. Could the common ancestor of these two species have possessed this analogous trait? How do we know these traits are analogous and not genetically related from common descent? (5 pts) d. Provide an image of each species in this comparison. (5 pts)

The dolphin was a land animal that then turned into the dolphin over many years and did not need a fin to survive originally, it was made from adaptation and evolution and that is why a dolphin has a fin like a shark though it's ancestor did not possess fins. The shark was always in the water and never on land.

After my research of each listed individual in the prompt, I have found Jean-Baptiste Lamarck to be the most influential over Charles Darwin's theory of Natural selection in a positive way. Lamarck attempted to find an explanation for the evolutionary process by hypothesizing that there was a dynamic relationship between a species and their environment, suggesting that they change and adapt when the environment changes. For example, he hypothesized that when an environment changes, the population of the environment would also change to adapt to the new environment, such as increasing or decreasing certain body parts that would be modified to help adapt to the new environment. I feel this influenced Darwin because he shared the same belief that populations of species adapted to their environment and were directly affected by their environment causing them to change over time with the use of natural selection. 

Lamarck contributed greatly to the scientific community by introducing the importance of interactions between organisms and their external environment in the evolutionary process. Below I have added a link that discusses a hypothesis he had on how giraffes necks got to be the length they are now. Though his hypothesis on that was wrong, it helped open a new way of viewing how species change and adapt due to their environments.

https://study.com/academy/lesson/jean-baptiste-lamarck-biography-facts-contributions.html

A bullet point that shows Lamarck’s influence on Darwin is “If the environment changes, the traits that are helpful or adaptive to the environment will be different”. This is because Lamarck introduced the correlation between species and their environment, and how traits change over time due to Natural selection. This helped Darwin see that when traits changed in a species due to the individuals with bad traits for their environment died off, it was because the good traits were being passed down through generations and being in a sense “perfected” for their environment so that they could prosper and multiply. Populations of species adapted over time through natural selection and reproduction. 

I don’t believe Darwin would have developed his theory of natural selection without the influence of Jean-Baptiste Lamarck. Lamarck opened a new way of thinking about how a species environment was connected with how the population of the species changed, and without that I feel that Darwin may not have thought about Natural selection as it’s what happened when the environment “selects” who will live and who will die based on their inherited traits, picking the stronger to live and the weaker to die.

The attitude of the church affected Darwin’s decision to publish his theory because he was afraid of the consequences of not going by exactly what the Bible says, that “god created every individual as they are” essentially. Back then it was looked down upon to think God wasn’t the reason for every living thing to be as they are, and the idea of evolution was very looked down upon. People who questioned anything about the Bible or the church were usually punished, and Darwin didn’t want his career to be over. He eventually did publish it, and now it has opened doors for new discoveries and to be taught in classes such as this one.