What Darwin Never Knew
Charles Darwin “The father of evolution” is famous for his theory of evolution. Darwin came up with this theory by observing finches and tortoises on the Galapagos islands. By studying the finches and tortoises, Darwin realized that species change. He theorized that organisms with traits that helped them live in their environment would live longer and reproduce, passing the advantageous trait down to their offspring. He called this survival of the fittest.
However, Darwin didn’t know the mechanism for how these traits were passed on. Genetics and DNA weren’t discovered until 1953, 71 years after Darwin died. DNA proved that Darwin’s theory was correct that species change over time because DNA doesn’t stay the same, it mutates. With the discovery of mutation, we know that genes are responsible for evolutionary change. Without mutation, everything would stay the same from generation to generation, which we know is not the case.
The discovery of DNA also changed how we view evolution. Before the discovery of DNA, we knew roughly how evolution worked, but
now we know that mutation in genetic code is what leads to different traits in species. For example, a mutation in the human jaw muscle is what allows humans to have bigger brains, a key difference between humans and chimps. We also now know that small differences in our genetic code make a huge difference, with there being only a 1 percent difference in DNA between humans and chimps. We also know that a huge part of evolution has to do with switches, which control what genes are “turned on” and what genes are “turned off”.
Lastly, the discovery of DNA changes how we research evolution in the future. To identify differences in species, we know to look for mutations in genes, then compare that gene to other organisms to see what differences the mutation makes. We also know that evolution doesn’t just happen in DNA that codes for a protein, but also in the switches that control those genes. Instead of wondering if there is a mutation in the gene that makes a protein, we can look for a mutation in the switch that controls that gene.
Overall, the discovery of DNA not only proved that Darwin’s theory was correct but opened several new ways to look at and research evolution. Instead of making hypotheses based on observable traits, we can now look at the genetic code of organisms. Not only that, we know where specifically we can look for mutations, whether that be in switches or the gene itself.
Sources:
Than, Ker. “What Is Darwin’s Theory of Evolution?” Livescience.Com, 17 May 2021, www.livescience.com/474-controversy-evolution-works.html.
Ramanujan, Krishna. “Genetic Switches Play Big Role in Human Evolution.” Cornell Chronicle, 13 June 2013, news.cornell.edu/stories/2013/06/genetic-switches-play-big-role-human-evolution.
“NOVA.” What Darwin Never Knew – NOVA PBS Documentary, 27 Dec. 2009, www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/what-darwin-never-knew.
English 10 Contextual Infographic
Loading...
Reload document 
Open in new tab Wonder Project
Humans are
fascinated with space, but is that a good thing? Have we gained anything important from our research on space, or are we better off focusing on our own planet?
The earth has so many problems. Climate change, poverty and racism and many more are all things that we urgently need to work on. So, in a planet full of all these problems, why focus on exploring and understanding the rest of our universe? Shouldn’t we focus on our planet compared to other celestial bodies? Does it really gain us anything useful?
Humans have a desire to explore. Throughout history, we’ve always been exploring. First, it was the areas immediately around us, then we went further. We started exploring the land around us, and when we figured that out, we got in boats and explored the sea. Eventually, once we’d explored our planet, we looked towards the sky, and wondered if we could explore what was up there.
But then that poses the question, is our desire for exploration doing us any good? That’s a difficult question to answer, and is of course, very subjective. I believe that it is doing us good, a lot of it actually. When we explore, we learn, and we can apply the knowledge we gain to fix the problems we already have. Exploring not only shows us new areas, it opens up a whole new wealth of knowledge.
How does it open up that knowledge though? It’s not like we find magical books in space telling us how to create dust busters. Actually, most of the technology we get from space exploration is spinoff technology. Spinoff technology is technology that has been developed with help from Nasa research. For example, technology NASA created to purify astronauts drinking water, is now also used on earth to kill bacteria in recreational pools. Now, one might argue that this technology isn’t necessary, or would’ve been created at some point. Well, it is possible that similar technology might have been created at some point, but at what point would that be? For all we know, without the technology we create to explore space, we could still be looking for a way to prevent glasses from breaking!
Now, spinoff technology is great, but other than that, what does space exploration offer? Well, for one, it offers some protection. Sure, the chances of an asteroid hitting earth are pretty slim, but the costs of that happening are so large, it’s better to be prepared for it. With our research and exploration of space around us, we’d know in advance if an asteroid was coming in our direction, and be able to plan ways to deflect it. That would’ve certainly helped the dinosaurs!
Other than asteroid protecting, space research and exploration gives us a back-up plan for if things go wrong on earth. Now, you might be thinking, that’s why we need to focus on earth, so things don’t go wrong, and I would agree, we do need to focus on earth. However, why can’t we do both? It’s not like space exploration is preventing us from doing something about climate change. We can focus on fixing our planet and focus on back-up plans, such as a permanent civilization on mars. Who knows, maybe we’ll create technology that can be used to fight climate change on earth while working towards getting to mars.
Another thing that benefits life on earth is satellites, something we wouldn’t have without space exploration and research. Some things that satellite technology can do is measure water quality from a 360 degree view, and even predict natural disasters. These are things that we’d have never been able to achieve if it weren’t for our curiosity and desire to learn about space.
Speaking of that curiosity, why do we even have it in the first place? Well, like our desire to explore, it’s in our nature. Being curious is just something humans are. As soon as we learn how to talk, the first words are “why?”. We want to find out how the world works, and once we learn about that, we want to know how the rest of the universe works. As we age, and we learn, the curiosity we initially had as children fades, but it never really disappears.
Without anything to satisfy that curiosity that we all have, we’d be miserable. Space exploration is that way that we satisfy our curiosity, the way that we feed our desire to explore. Two people can sit down in a room and argue about finances with regards to space all day. While I do believe space exploration and research is important, and does have many logical reasons to back that up, people often overlook the other reasons we explore space. We didn’t look up to the sky and wonder how we could benefit from it, we looked up at the sky and wondered if we could go there. We didn’t wonder this because of money, or logic, it had to do with our curiosity and desire to learn and explore.
We benefit from space research in so many ways, and a lot of the time, we don’t even realise it. From our research and exploration we’ve created new technologies, that can benefit us both in space and on earth. We’ve found ways to help our planet that we never would’ve found if we hadn’t gone into space, and we’ve also worked towards creating back-up plans to protect ourselves. Most importantly, we’ve found a way to continue exploring, and feed that child-like curiosity within ourselves that still looks at things and asks “why?”. So, to answer my original question, our fascination with space is a good thing, we’ve gained many important things from our research, and by focusing on space we can find new ways to help our planet.
A video about spinoff technology:
A very sarcastic video about space exploration and research:
Bibliography:
Griffin, Michael. “The Real Reason We Explore Space.” Air & Space Magazine, Air & Space Magazine, 1 July 2007, www.airspacemag.com/space/the-real-reasons-we-explore-space-18816871/.
Rainey, Kristine. “15 Ways the International Space Station Is Benefiting Earth.” NASA, 30 Oct. 2015, www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/news/15_ways_iss_benefits_earth.
Andrews, Robin George. “Can Spaceflight Save the Planet?” Scientific American, 6 Sept. 2019, www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-spaceflight-save-the-planet.
Wiles, Jennifer. “Why We Explore.” NASA, 30 Sept. 2013, www.nasa.gov/exploration/whyweexplore/why_we_explore_main.html#.YHsnb5-SnD5.
Granath, Bob. “Why Do We Explore?” NASA, 2 Oct. 2015, www.nasa.gov/feature/the-human-desire-for-exploration-leads-to-discovery.
Photo:
JPL. “20 Inventions We Wouldn’t Have Without Space Travel.” JPL, 20 May 2016, www.jpl.nasa.gov/infographics/20-inventions-we-wouldnt-have-without-space-travel.
Videos:
TEDx Talks. “Space Exploration is the Worst | Emily Calandrelli | TEDxIndianaUniversity.” YouTube, uploaded by Tedx, 23 Dec. 2015, www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqrahBJkKAs&feature=youtu.be.
Seeker. “What Is Space Exploration Doing For You?” YouTube, uploaded by Seeker, 1 Aug. 2014, www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZBjrwqxfnk&feature=youtu.be.
French 10 CC Reflection
Loading...
Science is Magic
The Video:
More Information:
Data Visualization
Infographic:
Loading...
Why I chose this topic:
I chose this topic because I wanted my topic to be relevant to today, and covid-19 is obviously a very relevant thing in today’s society. I chose to present my data in an infographic because I thought that the data I had collected would suit an infographic very well. I was also curious as to how to create an infographic, and how to use colors, shapes, and symbols to create something both informative and aesthetically pleasing. I collected data from a variety of sources, and to keep the comparison fair I compared the flu statistics for 2018 in Canada, to the covid statistics from 2020 in Canada.
Raw Data:
Loading...
Core Competency Reflection:
Loading...
Sources:
https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/epidemiological-summary-covid-19-cases.html#a7
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/symptoms-testing/symptoms.html
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/symptoms/symptoms.htm
https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/epidemiological-summary-covid-19-cases.html#a7
Paper Plane Lab
For our Paper Plane lab, me and my partner Kenya needed to answer the question “How does weight added to a paper plane effect the distance that plane can travel?”. To answer this question, we used the scientific method. First we created our hypothosis, that with more weight the distance travelled would increase, as the weight would add stability. We created a way to test this using paper clips to add weight. We found a paper plane design from wikihow (left), which said that it was a great design that would travel a long distance. Unfortunatly for us, the paper plane was not a good design and flew very inconsistantly, and did not fly at all the distance we expected it to. The results of the plane on the left were also very inconistent. With the least weight, the plane travelled the farthest, and the middle amount of weight the shortest, with the most amount of weight travelling the second farthest. Not only did this not match up with our hypothesis, it made no sense. Unsatisfied and confused with our results, we concluded that our design was the problem, and decided to try again.
With the last half hour of class time, Kenya and I created a new paper airplane (right), and re-did the tests, with the same materials from before, only a different paper plane. Our assumption that the design was the problem was correct, as the new design flew consistently and much further. We added the weight, and the results this time were much better. Like we had said in our hypothosis, the distance travelled increased as we added weight. We were very pleased with the results the second time around, and very glad that we had chosen to experiment with a new design.
