Upload
Login or register

hankiepankie

Last status update:
-
Date Signed Up:8/08/2010
Last Login:4/05/2015
Stats
Content Thumbs: 333 total,  388 ,  55
Comment Thumbs: 32 total,  88 ,  56
Content Level Progress: 30% (3/10)
Level 33 Content: Peasant → Level 34 Content: Peasant
Comment Level Progress: 60% (33/55)
Level 0 Comments: Untouched account → Level 1 Comments: New Here
Subscribers:0
Content Views:31115
Times Content Favorited:11 times
Total Comments Made:137
FJ Points:341

Text Posts

latest user's comments

#16 - My cat was given this as a gift. As you can see, she did in fa…  [+] (2 replies) 12/11/2014 on Unicat +5
User avatar
#21 - capslockrage (12/12/2014) [-]
Why is hers ribbed for pleasure?
#23 - hankiepankie (12/12/2014) [-]
Ha, if you look at the packaging it is ribbed
#286 - Well the sun is several hundred thousand times larger in volum…  [+] (2 replies) 05/17/2014 on Random Fact Comp. 35 0
#287 - anon (05/17/2014) [-]
Larger in volume but not radius. Yes, the sun is millions of times larger than the earth, in volume, but it's not nearly as large a proportion diameter wise.
#296 - hankiepankie (05/17/2014) [-]
Ah, you're right, I was thinking the diameter/volume relationship would be linear, but it's actually more logarithmic.
#206 - I'll start off by saying you don't need to define your terms--…  [+] (1 reply) 05/01/2014 on Random Fact Comp 13 0
#210 - Mandible (05/01/2014) [-]
The mandible will never change!!
yes, yes I know. IDC
#94 - Uh, dude, look at the australopithecines and preaustralopithec…  [+] (5 replies) 05/01/2014 on Random Fact Comp 13 0
#209 - Mandible (05/01/2014) [-]
WHAT!?
User avatar
#202 - leadfacial (05/01/2014) [-]
While you're right that changes in brain size usually mean in a change in intelligence it's not actually the most direct indicator, like i mentioned if brain mass was the true indication of intelligence, the blue whale would be the dominant species. It's based on ratio of brain size to body mass. I'm not saying mandible changes mean they're smarter, I'm just saying logically it affects the shape of the skull, you can at least agree with me on that right? What matters on brain increase for us that we equate to our higher cognitive functioning is which part of the brain grew faster than the others andd that would be our cerebral cortex (the outer layer), cuz it's almost disproportionaly larger than the rest of our brain which is one of the explanations for why we developped a rounded skull without a sagittal crest (spine at the top of the skull), the increase in cerebral cortex proportions is shown in some of the great apes as well and those ones tend to be able to use tools too (Bonobos, gorillas, chimps and orangutans to name the popular ones). All I'm saying is that physical brain mass does not equal intelligence, it may affect it sure but it's not as direct as we think.
#208 - Mandible (05/01/2014) [-]
: /
#206 - hankiepankie (05/01/2014) [-]
I'll start off by saying you don't need to define your terms--I know them. What I'm saying is that our brain-casing did not enlarge because our mandible changed...like I said, you can look at the diversity of australopithecine mandibles some gracile and some robust, they all had very similar sized brain-cases though some had larger sagittal crests for jaw muscles. Our brains grew because there was great selection on intelligence--not to protect from "mini concussions". Yes brains size is not the indicator for intelligence, but neither is, as you say, brain to body mass. If that were the case, you'd be saying ants and many birds were more intelligent than us. There is a lot more going on in the brain than just the mass; namely a lot with surface are in which more synapses can take place. So, lastly, mandibles really don't have much to do with intelligence--whenever an ape changes its diet in the fossil record, it either increases or decreases its skull crests and dentition; never the volume of its braincase, like we did.
#210 - Mandible (05/01/2014) [-]
The mandible will never change!!
yes, yes I know. IDC
[ 134 Total ]