Re: Human genome evolving?
jmhall_at_apex.home.net
Date: 01/14/05
- Next message: John Turmel: "TURMEL: #3 Why no charge from Manitoba Kid"
- Previous message: Gistak: "Re: Why Europe can't hold out - Brooks, NY Times"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Human genome evolving?"
- Next in thread: Les Cargill: "Re: Human genome evolving?"
- Reply: Les Cargill: "Re: Human genome evolving?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 13 Jan 2005 21:52:56 -0500
"robert j. kolker" <nowhere@nowhere.net> writes:
> jmhall@apex.home.net wrote:
>
> > I don't see that that matters. If the genetic mutation
> > produces a differential advantage within the environment
> > then that genetic mutation propogates and survives, displacing
> > those without the mutation. You don't need separation of
> > a part of the species. I think what you're talking about
> > is speciation which is not the whole of evolution.
>
> Speciation is the observable part of evolution. Everything else is
> just the normal range of genetic variation within the species. If you
> are going to regard every little variation as evolution then be aware
> social adaptation is a much stronger effect than genetic variation.
I certainly agree that social adaptations have a much
more profound and certainly a more immediate effect.
I'm simple rejecting the notion that we need isolation
in the population to produce real genetic evolution.
My propostion is that hold the natural environment
constant, assume that social adaptations and innovations
done take a turn that puts us back in the stone age
type setting but assume technology (except for genetic
technological of redesigning the human genome), no
isolation of populations and 500,000 years.
Any fundamental reason to think the "human" of
the the future would be able to breed with
one of today--or even be recognized by one
of today as a human?
jmh
- Next message: John Turmel: "TURMEL: #3 Why no charge from Manitoba Kid"
- Previous message: Gistak: "Re: Why Europe can't hold out - Brooks, NY Times"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Human genome evolving?"
- Next in thread: Les Cargill: "Re: Human genome evolving?"
- Reply: Les Cargill: "Re: Human genome evolving?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|