Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Hybrid Vigor

Expand Messages
  • somitcw
    ... I disagree with your definition of product of a straightforward evolution . It might match non-sexual evolution like mtDNA and parts of the Y-chromosome
    Message 1 of 2 , Nov 3, 2012
      --- In AAT@yahoogroups.com,
      "terry" <terry.turner1602@...> wrote:
      > More articles are being published confirming that many
      >communities of modern man are being found to have inherited
      >genetic material from now extinct relatives. Until recently
      >the possibility of interbreeding among these other species
      >was somewhat controversial. Now Neanderthal genes are being
      >credited with supplying modern Eurasian humans with their
      >more robust immune systems.
      > Leaving aside any cultural biases such a conclusion might
      >suggest, this does also suggest that man as we know him today
      >is not the product of a straightforward evolution. We didn't
      >evolve along the simple stick-tree graphic we like to picture
      >in books, but rather from a melting pot of many survivors.
      > If you accept that Neanderthals were a separate species then
      >this may indeed be an example of hybrid vigor. Technically
      >this is called heterosis. The suggestion that this mixing of
      >genes resulted in a more robust immune system referred to as
      >major histocompatibility complex. Referring to the mixing of
      >genes from more genetically distant individuals increasing
      >the range of diseases the immune system will recognize and
      >respond to.
      > So present research does suggest that modern man is a
      >biological as well as a cultural hybridization of two or more
      >species. The intermingling of one or more aquatic populations
      >along the way could easily become lost in the molecular clutter
      >of our DNA, which we are still learning about.
      > With this growing acceptance that modern man is a mixture of
      >two (and probably more) know species there is no reason to
      >insist that there was only one aquatic interlude and only one >aquatically inclined species. Some could well have been much
      >more aquatic than others.
      > Unfortunately it is unlikely that anyone will recognize such
      >aquatic genetic contributions if they are not being actively
      >looked for. With finding actual remains of an aquatic relation
      >to supply with DNA to compare unlikely for now, some clues may
      >be found by looking at other aquatic mammals. Such comparisons
      >between human and aquatic mammal DNA could bridge the
      >theoretical or emotional barriers that most traditional
      >researchers might have to actively associating themselves with
      >the aquatic theory. Or at least allow them to claim some
      >distance from supporters of the theory to their colleagues.
      > Search words: Hybrid vigor , heterosis , outbreeding
      >enhancement , major histocompatibility complex ,
      > Terry

      I disagree with your definition of "product of a
      straightforward evolution". It might match non-sexual
      evolution like mtDNA and parts of the Y-chromosome but
      does not match sexual evolution except for the OoA theory.
      For all species of sexual plants and sexual animals except
      for OoA humans, sexual evolution is a web or mesh, not a
      branch off of a branch off of a branch. Species migrate,
      adapt to local conditions, add good, bad, and neutral
      mutations, merge back creating a new populations that
      keep the best adaptations and lose the worst, then
      repeating many times. That is the true normal sexual
      "straightforward evolution".

      The one exception to normal sexual evolution is the OoA
      theory. It requires that humankind spread into thousands
      of villages, people are blocked from having off-springs
      with people of other villages, all except one village dies,
      and then the process is repeated hundreds or thousands of
      times until people in one village that just has to be in
      Africa, somehow have all of the genes that people in other
      parts of the world had, but not by gene-flow from other
      parts of the world. That village spread back out and slew
      all other humans and re-adapted to the new locations and
      developed some of the same identical features, traits, and
      genes that previous human populations had previously had in
      each area.

      I'm not a professional anything and never understood OoA
      so my description could be a little slanted.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.