(April 16, 2010) Robert Sapolsky discusses various methods of innate recognition of relatives between animals and humans through protein signatures, olfactory cellular mechanisms, cognitive, and sensory processes. He explores the importance of relatedness in animal mating/ovulation cycles and other phenomena that show how organisms identify each other. Stanford University www.stanford.edu Stanford Department of Biology http Stanford University Channel on YouTube www.youtube.com
“…in Esperanto.”
I’M LITERALLY LOLING AFTER THAT
Trust me, I tried to get over it, but I cannot. I have always had a hard time blocking out noises. I think my father raised me that way. I go nuts when I hear people chewing with their mouth open.
Love how he talks himself into his own questions…beautiful: (In regard to a difference in bonding between vaginal birth vs. cesarean) “I don’t know, but that suggests it should be happening…and maybe I should find that out…”
Seriously, you can’t ask for a better teacher than that!
I seem to be one of the 5 people to have understood the Esperanto joke.
I just found out !!
he doesn’t have any facebook or twitter :l
Is he in ZZ Top?
Fascinating!
BEST PROFESSOR SO CALM ,HIS WAY OF SPEAKING HAS A BALMING EFFECT
Wooo English grads! What a mistake I made.
I started to google this Chutes and Ladders study while he was talking. I feel like a fool.
What a beard! I’m jealous. Can’t wait till I get old enough to grow one…
About 21:15 into it, when the camera monkey pans the audience, it looks like an ad for apple inc.
i was happy w/ this vid till iread this…. lol : [
He changed his shirt!
Am I the only one who is annoyed by the guy clicking his pen the whole time?
It has ruined the whole thing for me. If he sat next to me in class, I would probably stab him in the neck with his pen. My cortisone levels are at a dangerous level.
That’s a very clear explanation and a point well made I think! In particular I liked your reference to Alliance Theory as I had never heard of that before, I’d thought of it but had no idea it was an actual theory. I’d imagine brothers and sisters who’d been separated would be much more likely to mate than unrelated siblings who’d grown up together – I’d say the selection is more for “group adherence behaviour” which gives rise to incest taboo rather than inbuilt repulsion.
Oh, BTW, Professor Sapolsky mention that unrelated children reared together on Israeli Kibbutzim avoided one another as sexual partners. However, I don’t believe he mention that out of 2516 marriages documented in Israel, 200 were between couples reared in the same kibbutz. Now his ignorance is forgivable, providing he doesn’t teach such a lie to his students and points out that the incest taboo is too complex to be purely genetic.
Also, I mentioned Alliance Theory explains the incest taboo.
…most effective way to find individuals with genetic defects and eliminate them from the gene pool. The problem with the “back legs” on the German Shepard is the result of selecting out individuals with particular traits while failing to realize the dogs also had an unapparent trait that could cause hip and elbow dysplasia. Of course, inbreeding is also the quickest and most effective way for breeders to find preferred genetic traits. Inbreeding is a handy tool in the hands of the professional
@ninjatoothpaste, natural selection occurs when some individuals are more prolific than others, and those that have more offspring differ genetically from those that have fewer. Sexual selection and selective breeding (by humans) can be thought of as special kinds of natural selection
When inbreeding results in more frequent expression of detrimental traits, whether or not those animals continue to exist and proliferate is determined by the selective process. Inbreeding is the quickest and…
P.S. Forgive my lack of clarity, I should have made the distinction more clear. I’m plenty aware that there is no magical appearance of two heads and a beard made of testicles as dictated by the divine law of commonly held misconception hehe