marileigh

http://www.4degreez.com/misc/personality_disorder_...

Respond with your results and your religious affiliation (or lack of).

Me = Jew

Paranoid: Low

Schizoid: Low

Schizotypal: Low

Antisocial: Low

Borderline: Low

Histrionic: Low

Narcissistic: Low

Avoidant: Moderate

Dependent: Low

Obsessive-Compulsive: Low

My husband saw a car for sale on ebay tonight while looking for a new car alarm system. The car was a 2006 entry-level luxury vehicle, listed for an extremely low price (under 1K). The description stated that the car had been in an accident but had been refurbished. The seller has an excellent rating with several pages of feedback.

My husband would like to know whether a) anyone here has ever purchased a car off ebay (we have not) and b) this seems too good to be true (seems like it to us). He doesn't want to buy the car, he's just kind of curious.

Not the painting itself obviously (I don't have $5.6 million), but a print. I've been looking all over the web and can't find a place to purchase one. Do no prints of this painting exist? That seems unlikely...

If someone could help direct me, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks.

I'd like to plan to go whale watching on Cape Cod this weekend. Can anyone recommend a particular company, or make any other suggestions for selecting a company? Any information would be appreciated.

This apple crisp recipe (http://www.epicurious.com/recipes/food/views/Apple... ) is one of my fall favorites. I have had and served it hot and at room temperature, and it's always great. I am throwing a baby shower in early November, and we're doing a brunch-type menu, and I was thinking of including the crisp as a dessert. The only thing is, the crisp involves a considerable amount of prep time because of having to peel and slice all the apples (even using my handy apple corer/peeler/slicer). I know I'm going to be running around the morning of the shower, and so was wondering whether it might be possible to make and freeze the crisp ahead of time - say, the weekend before - and then thaw and bake the crisp on the day of the shower. My mother makes and freezes apple pies each fall, and that's what gave me the idea.

Any cooks out there who might be able to tell me whether it would be possible to freeze and then later bake this apple crisp?

Thanks!

OK, it can be spiritually speaking, or not.

I have two non-negotiable rules in my marriage:

1) No pet snakes

2) No motorcycles

Everything else I'd be willing to at least discuss. I might be really against something (like, my husband wanting to screw other women), but I'd at least be willing to listen to a serious and reasoned argument. The two above items though are no way, no how, never never never.

Do you have any "rules" that are just not up for discussion? What are they?

I am doing a bunch of cleaning tonight, and I've filled a few bags with stuff I'm going to take to the Salvation Army tomorrow. A lot of the items were gifts. I feel kind of guilty getting rid of them, but there's only so much 'stuff' I can keep before my house becomes too cluttered. I keep telling family and friends to PLEASE stop buying us gifts for holidays and birthdays - I'd rather have a book or a bottle of wine or just have lunch together. My house has too much 'stuff' in it already.

Do you donate or otherwise get rid of gifts you've been given? Do you feel guilty when you do so?

I am having an unusual period this month, and I was wondering if anyone could suggest some thoughts as to the cause.

My period this month began a few days early, but the entire time (the past 5 days) has been like the very end of a normal period for me. That is, the blood has been completely brown (no red at all), it has been very light, and I have not had any cramps.

My periods used to be irregular when I was younger, but they have been regular for many years now. They come on a 28/29 day cycle, and are normally very heavy with horrific cramps for the first 3-4 days. Last month I had bad cramps the first day, but my cramps were abnormally light after that. Period was otherwise normal for me. I've never had a period like this month's, though nothing that I can think of has changed in my life over the past month.

I have not had sex nor sexual activity between this period and my last one, so there is no chance that I am pregnant.

Any of your thoughts would be very much appreciated. Thank you.

I'm a bit torn, myself. On the one hand, I feel that any consenting adults who wish to marry should be able to do so (I'm in favor of legalizing both gay marriage and polygamous marriage). On the other, I feel as though there's a very good reason why biological kin should not produce offspring - and that's the high incidence of birth defects and likelihood of recessive genetic disorders.

I was thinking about this today after someone posted a link to a youtube video of a German couple who are brother and sister. The siblings were raised apart (and so those early childhood kin recognition mechanisms never had a chance to preclude any later romantic feelings), and met each other as adults and fell in love.

Should they be allowed to marry? Or, better question, should it be against the law for them to marry? What if a condition of a legal marriage between close biological kin was that one partner must agree to be sterilized, so that the couple could not have children?

For the record, I'm female, and married to a man who is not even remotely related to me (nor do I even have a brother). I'm asking this to see what others' opinions are, not because I have a thing for one of my relatives.

Why do you come here, and why do you answer questions? What is your motivation, or what do you find enjoyable about it? Does your motivation vary by section? Do you answer questions in this section only, or in multiple sections?

I answer questions almost exclusively in the Biology section and here in R&S. I answer questions in the Bio section because I enjoy doing so, but also because I sometimes find it challenging. Having to provide factually correct answers often requires me to do some reading online, refer to a textbook or notes, etc. I like that it that trying to provide an accurate answer often requires me to learn more.

This section is more of a guilty pleasure. I actually first visited this section because of the evolution questions/answers by creationists that are common in the Bio section. Here, I do occasionally try to provide some factual answers (on either evolution or Judaism), but many times I'm just expressing my opinion on questions unrelated to either of those subjects.

What questions do you answer, and why?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtPplZnPuMA

What makes you think that you're a better person than those who believe differently than you? On what basis do you think you are more moral, more honest, more kind, more enlightened, and just all around "better" than someone who holds different beliefs?

Serious question.

I was looking over the Pew U.S. Religious Landscape Survey today, and noted that vast majority of the Jehovah's Witness respondants were not registered to vote, and didn't identify as Republican/Democrat/Independant/etc. I assume this is specifically prohibited by the religion, but wasn't aware of it until today. Can someone explain to me the actual prohibitions in relation to voting and politics, and the reasons for them? Thanks.

One of the most compelling hypotheses for the origin of eukaryotes is the hydrogen hypothesis, proposed by Martin and Mueller in a 1998 Nature paper. In brief, the hydrogen hypothesis posits that methanogens (methane-producing archaea that live in swamps and in the intestines), which generate their energy by reacting hydrogen gas with carbon dioxide, lived in close proximity to proteobacteria in the deep ocean where oxygen was scarce. The proteobacteria, which were metabolically versatile, fermented their food for energy in this anerobic environment, and excreted hydrogen gas and carbon dioxide as waste products. The methanogens, which have a cytoskeleton, began to surround the proteobacteria as they fed off the hydrogen secreted by the bacteria; the methanogens whose cytoskeletons allowed this had a selective advantage, as they were better able to feed. Eventually, the proteobacteria moved completely inside the methanogens, as their remaining surface area did not allow them to absorb enough for their metabolic needs. The methanogens which incorporated some proteobacteria genes into their genomes preferentially survived, as they could absorb enough food to feed the proteobacteria living inside of them, and thus could maintain their supply of methane.

These chimeric cells were the precursor to the single-celled eukaryotes with hydrogenosomes (mitochondria-like organelles that generate energy and release hydrogen gas) that exist today.

However, the incorporation of the proteobacterial genes into the methanogens now also allowed them to absorb food from the surroundings, which meant they could generate energy by fermentation and not just hydrogen metabolism. This enabled the methanogens to move to areas where the oxygen that would have previously prevented their hydrogen metabolism was more abundant; in this oxygen-rich environment, the internalized, metabolically-versatile proteobacteria could produce energy more efficiently by aerobic respiration, and both organisms benefited from the increased energy production. These chimeric cells that moved to an oxygen-rich environment were the precursor to the eukaryotes with mitochondria (including me and you) that we see today.

Some of the evidence that supports this hypothesis includes:

-the informational gene sequences of eukaryotic cells seem to be most closely related to methanogens (details published in Nature in 1998 and 2004 by Rivera et al.)

-the gene sequence of a rare hydrogenosome (from a parasite in the hind-gut of cockroaches) that had retained its genome demonstrates that hydrogenosomes and mitochondria share a common proteobacterial ancestor (Hackstein and colleagues, published in Nature in 1998)

-some extant hydrogenosome-containing eukaryotes host methanogens, which live in a metabolic symbiosis with the hydrogenosomes

-the first eukaryotes seem to have evolved at the same time oxygen levels rose in the earth’s atmosphere, about 2 billion years ago. When oxygen levels rose in the atmosphere, sulfate concentrations rose in the ocean (as the formation of sulfate requires oxygen). The rising sulfate levels in the ocean led to a rise in sulfate-reducing bacteria, which reduce sulfate to hydrogen-sulfide, and which out-compete methanogens for hydrogen. These new sulfate and sulfate-reducing bacteria rich oceanic conditions would have provided an even greater selective advantage for methanogens who developed a metabolic partnership with the hydrogen-producing proteobacteria.

(All of the above is simplified to some degree, to make for easier comprehension by those who do not have a strong background in the topics)

My question is to those who don’t believe in evolution, or only believe in what some creationists refer to as “microevolution.” What about this scenario is implausible? (note: you personally not understanding it is not enough to make it implausible) And, if you do not have a valid reason to call it implausible, would the evolution of eukaryotes not constitute one “type” evolving into a different “type?”

Note: most of the summary above (not word for word, but in essence) comes from readings in the book Power, Sex and Suicide: Mitochondria and the Meaning of Life, by Nick Lane.

One of the most compelling hypotheses for the origin of eukaryotes is the hydrogen hypothesis, proposed by Martin and Mueller in a 1998 Nature paper. In brief, the hydrogen hypothesis posits that methanogens (methane-producing archaea that live in swamps and in the intestines), which generate their energy by reacting hydrogen gas with carbon dioxide, lived in close proximity to proteobacteria in the deep ocean where oxygen was scarce. The proteobacteria, which were metabolically versatile, fermented their food for energy in this anerobic environment, and excreted hydrogen gas and carbon dioxide as waste products. The methanogens, which have a cytoskeleton, began to surround the proteobacteria as they fed off the hydrogen secreted by the bacteria; the methanogens whose cytoskeletons allowed this had a selective advantage, as they were better able to feed. Eventually, the proteobacteria moved completely inside the methanogens, as their remaining surface area did not allow them to absorb enough for their metabolic needs. The methanogens which incorporated some proteobacteria genes into their genomes preferentially survived, as they could absorb enough food to feed the proteobacteria living inside of them, and thus could maintain their supply of methane.

These chimeric cells were the precursor to the single-celled eukaryotes with hydrogenosomes (mitochondria-like organelles that generate energy and release hydrogen gas) that exist today.

However, the incorporation of the proteobacterial genes into the methanogens now also allowed them to absorb food from the surroundings, which meant they could generate energy by fermentation and not just hydrogen metabolism. This enabled the methanogens to move to areas where the oxygen that would have previously prevented their hydrogen metabolism was more abundant; in this oxygen-rich environment, the internalized, metabolically-versatile proteobacteria could produce energy more efficiently by aerobic respiration, and both organisms benefited from the increased energy production. These chimeric cells that moved to an oxygen-rich environment were the precursor to the eukaryotes with mitochondria (including me and you) that we see today.

Some of the evidence that supports this hypothesis includes:

-the informational gene sequences of eukaryotic cells seem to be most closely related to methanogens (details published in Nature in 1998 and 2004 by Rivera et al.)

-the gene sequence of a rare hydrogenosome (from a parasite in the hind-gut of cockroaches) that had retained its genome demonstrates that hydrogenosomes and mitochondria share a common proteobacterial ancestor (Hackstein and colleagues, published in Nature in 1998)

-some extant hydrogenosome-containing eukaryotes host methanogens, which live in a metabolic symbiosis with the hydrogenosomes

-the first eukaryotes seem to have evolved at the same time oxygen levels rose in the earth’s atmosphere, about 2 billion years ago. When oxygen levels rose in the atmosphere, sulfate concentrations rose in the ocean (as the formation of sulfate requires oxygen). The rising sulfate levels in the ocean led to a rise in sulfate-reducing bacteria, which reduce sulfate to hydrogen-sulfide, and which out-compete methanogens for hydrogen. These new sulfate and sulfate-reducing bacteria rich oceanic conditions would have provided an even greater selective advantage for methanogens who developed a metabolic partnership with the hydrogen-producing proteobacteria.

(All of the above is simplified to some degree, to make for easier comprehension by those who do not have a strong background in the topics)

My question is to those who don’t believe in evolution, or only believe in what some creationists refer to as “microevolution.” What about this scenario is implausible? (note: you personally not understanding it is not enough to make it implausible) And, if you do not have a valid reason to call it implausible, would the evolution of eukaryotes not constitute one “type” evolving into a different “type?”

My husband of 6 years and his mother had quite an argument tonight. The argument began a few hours ago with a misunderstanding, escalated in later phone calls as my mother-in-law told my husband some things that she's felt hurt by recently, and got much, much worse when they began arguing over something my husband's mother did 12 years ago that changed the trajectory of his life. The last phone call ended with my husband yelling obscenities at her.

Tomorrow is my brother-in-law's birthday, and we're all supposed to have dinner together to celebrate. Excellent timing. Skipping the dinner isn't an option for my husband and I (I won't let his brother suffer for an issue that has nothing to do with him), but I don't know how to keep this from impacting my brother-in-law's birthday celebration tomorrow night.

Any suggestions?

Asking my husband to apologize to his mother tomorrow isn't an option - the issue on which they ended the conversation is FAR too big and the emotional baggage too entrenched to get over in a day. It's been too big for them to get past in 12 years.

I just need some suggestions on how to manage the situation tomorrow when we all have to be together.

Thanks for your help.

Why or why not? Do you think the measles, mumps and rubella vaccines that are currently mandatory in the US should continue to be mandatory? If there was a vaccine that was effective in the prevention of HIV infection, would you think it should be mandatory? I just had a long conversation with my mother on these issues, and am interested in hearing the thoughts of others.

I am going to be visiting La Plata in September, and will not have a car. Some of the time during my visit will be spent at this address: Calle 526 y Camino General Belgrano (entre 10 y 11) B1900BTE

Can anyone recommend any hotels nearby? Thanks for your help!