Jump to content
Banner by ~ Ice Princess Silky

Puzzle

Muffin
  • Posts

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Puzzle

  1. About 44-45 min into the Friendship Games movie, Pinkie stands by a door as Raindbow Dash talks. In the most creepy fashion, her eyes slowly focus apart from each other. (Like crossing your eyes, but backwards.) Any thoughts about this? To me it seemed too much to be an animation error. But it seemed too random, even for a "Pinkie is so random" joke. I love the randomness of Pinkie, but I just thought this was odd, misplaced, and out of character. I just didn't get it. Any opinions about if this was intentional or an accident? And if intentional, did it seem "normal" or out-of-place to you? If you need help finding the scene:
  2. Yep. And here's a coloring page with Derpy (artist allowed coloring)! Source: http://fav.me/d46wcdc l
  3. It usually suggested that you involve: 1. Muffins (eat, share) 2. Delivery (give out gifts/cards/stickers, mail letters/postcards, something mailmare related) I've also seen people say you should: 3. Make "derpy eyes" in photographs (as best you can) 4. Wear grey/yellow 5. Photograph or carry around Derpy toys Me: Last year I printed out Derpy related line-art and had a coloring day scheduled with a friend, but they got sick and had to cancel. So I colored them by myself. Plus, I only like chocolate muffins, and I'm allergic to chocolate. Any easy-to-make, tasty, oatmeal / cinnamon type muffin recipe suggestions? (not blueberry or poppy seed, yuck!) There's a page on Facebook for sharing your Derpy Day photos too - the original FB page shared by Equestria Daily was dropped (I talked to the guy), but there's one called "Derpy Day (March 1st)". It's not super active - but it's more active than an other FB pages I looked at (a year or so ago). I think Feb 29th should be Derpy day - and March 1st could be the "observed" Derpy Day!
  4. If you post a photo - try posting an actual photograph of a person standing next to the photo, so people can see how big it is. Also show the thickness of the pony: is it printed on cardstock? poster material? cardboard? etc.
  5. Don't forget about the pegasus ponies and unicorn ponies - they are probably having most of the unicorn and pegasus children. Of course, in the show - we can assume that each race usually comes from parents that match. Otherwise, people wouldn't be questioning or trying to explain how earth ponies had non-earth children. However, I hope everyone agrees that the chances the writers considered any "cannon" explanation of how this works is practically nill. That being said, I prefer something like the explanation below, but with percentages favoring the race of the parents. So if you stay in a relationship too long, - pony magic might decide it's time for you to be a parent! In all likelihood, if the writers were ever pressed to explain, there's probably a stork pony or something. You just don't question the stork. Or stork-pony, in this case. -------------------- It actually uses two genes. Their example just has only 3 alleles in total, because each gene had 2 allele options, but the allele they named "u" was identical for gene I and gene II. (But I'm guessing your point was more about how they made it too simple. My example explanation pictogram also makes it very simple.) Yes, definitely. Examples can be made up involving many genes, and/or multiple alleles. Examples can also be made up using only one gene with 3 alleles. Most physical traits (phenotypes) can be traced to variation in multiple genes, like those you listed. However, it is possible to have such a feature be regulated by one gene, even though it is complex. For example, you might have hundreds of genes that are needed to create the wings in a pegasus, but it only takes a single gene to activate or cancel the sequence to develop that wing in the embryo. A complex trait involving thousands of genes can be "turned off" by a single allele (from a single gene). I'm not disagreeing with Clover Heart, merely adding to her commentary.
  6. Woot! - Now, I'm officially an old lady! But Hello Kitty has to share the car-dashboard space with a pony. My friend's a brony and I hid a tiny image of Luna into the "Lightning storm" generic wallpaper on his family computer. I had to get a copy of the wallpaper from a fellow Mac user and edit a Luna into the clouds so she looked 'naturally placed'. Then get it onto their computer when no one was looking. Nathan Drake:
  7. Ha ha - well, maybe the zygote cannot develop without certain magical conditions. It is likely the mother would never even know that that combination had been attempted. Would that serve your pony headcannon wishes better? That too matches a genetic example used in biology classes sometimes - a type of drawfism. (There are many types of dwarfism, and it's not always passed down genetically as it is a realatively 'easy' mutation you can end up with. But, let's get to this particular example...) In one type of dwarfism, the trait is expressed when you have one of each "flavor". For example, I am standard-height and such my two alleles for the gene are "normal+normal". A person with this type of dwarfism will have one of each "flavor". They have "normal+dwarfism". It is possible for two dwarf parents to have a standard-height child (25% chance). It is possible for them to have a dwarf child (50% chance). There is a 25% chance the child will have the "dwarfism+dwarfism" combination - which is believed to be fatal early on. The child is never born. Thus when looking at born children, the chances skew to 67% chance of having a dwarf child and 33% chance of having a standard-height child. (Recall the reality show you might have seen called "Little People, Big World". I do not know the type of dwarfism the parents had, but they birthed standard-height children.) So we can consider the "hhww" alicorn combination to be unfeasable. Thus, the practical chances of each child type (the chances of being born) become: Earth baby: 60% chance, Pegasus baby: 20% chance, Unicorn baby: 20% chance. (Your reply occured while I was typing mine above) - Yes, I agree that your embryo difficulty could be a feasable way to explain that. However, many students make the common mistake of thinking that "dominant" means common. It doesn't. It was only "common" in that particular Punnett Square where we had an even mix of "flavors" (both parents had multi-flavors!) Mr. and Mrs. Cake just happen to be heterozygous for both traits (heterozygous = multi-flavor for a gene) (that means, they just happen to be secret carriers). That doesn't mean it's common. Most earth ponies are probably HHWW. Thus most babies from earth ponies will be HHWW. Earth ponies carrying a secret "flavor" for horns (HhWW) or a secret flavor for wings (HHWw) are rare. Carrying both would be even more rare (HhWw). We just happened to see that example (teachers teach it to you because it shows the most varied results - so it's good for teaching. But that doesn't mean it's "normal" or "common"!) Keep in mind - the "flavor" that makes you have 6 fingers on your hand is DOMINANT. But it isn't common, now is it? Most of us only have 5 fingers on our hands! 5 fingers is Recessive! I can show you Punnett Squares, if you want. Does calling them "flavors" and saying "multi-flavor" make it easier than calling them "alleles" and "heterozygous"?
  8. Okay guys, I know this is an old thread - but I came across it as one of the first 10 search results. I can't believe how many bronies didn't pay attention in Biology class! (not just this thread) You're free to make up any old explanation for the Cake family, because it's a cartoon, and it even has magic. However, you're not free to say it's not possible, especially when it's one of the most commonly used genetic examples taught in middle school and high school biology class! I can understand not remembering the details of how this works, but - do so many of you not even remember the general fact that it's possible? (Some of you seemed to!) And the original post is just silly, if your only knowledge of genetics is a Punnett Square that uses only one gene with only two possible alleles and basic dominant/recessive conditions - then you should know that you don't know enough to be making claims of what's not possible in genetics! D: It would be better to word a claim like that on the "safe side", like "I don't see how it's possible, this is the only Punnett Square I can figure out." Please, please, tell me that all your teachers didn't only show you that one type of example and neglect to mention that it's almost never that simple, especially in animals! The second example listed with Twilight "explaining" - well, that person seems to have attended biology class, but clearly didn't understand some of it. Points for trying though. They remembered that you can have more than one gene and how to do a 2-gene Punnett Square. They didn't remember genetic notation rules, but I know some teachers don't teach that correctly. They are way off on dominance, not sure how that happened, but it's a decent, although weirdly complicated, idea. Half the kids born in Cloudsdale could be unicorns, lol (and they can't walk on clouds, I picture them dropping through! Aghh!). It's just weird that someone would go through that trouble when a common example (same Punnett Square) with a simpler explanation would do. It's almost the same thing! (EDIT: based on a comment made - maybe they were trying to invent a way to explain why alicorns were special and couldn't be birthed by any combination of Earth, Unicorn, or Pegasus!)
×
×
  • Create New...