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

FW: [Ancient Civilisations] Using evolution against itself

Expand Messages
  • Dave Hall
    Thought this was an interesting argument, therefore I cross-posted. -Dave ... From: Dave Hall Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 10:26 AM To:
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 7, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Thought this was an interesting argument, therefore I cross-posted.


      -----Original Message-----
      From: Dave Hall
      Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 10:26 AM
      To: 'ancient_civilisations@yahoogroups.com'
      Subject: RE: [Ancient Civilisations] Using evolution against itself

      Actually, the odds of duplicate chromosomal "defects" in a set of offspring
      can and do appear under incestuous conditions particularly. Such a fact
      appears to place species evolution in direct conflict with accepted human
      morays, or are "human morals" in contradiction to nature's requirements???
      Hmmm. Perhaps legislating against an activity that we may find disgusting
      isn't such a good idea after all, even though such activities do often
      produce bizaar abnormalities in the short term, if humanity's future is of
      any value to humans.

      In any case, a set of closely related parents can produce a group of
      offspring chromosomally "off the mark" who are unable to breed with the
      species of the parent but who can breed within the exclusive chromosomal
      "batch" of offspring. This would make such organisms "a new bifurcation" --
      a different but related species.


      -----Original Message-----
      From: jdcroft [mailto:gaiawest@...]
      Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 11:50 PM
      To: ancient_civilisations@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [Ancient Civilisations] Using evolution against itself

      In reply to Toni's posy

      > A practical observation: genetic adaptation, yes, but not
      > chromosomal reorganization, which would require identical genetic
      > changes in at least two members of a species at the same time. What
      > are the odds of that? Is this an instance in which incestuous
      > behavior (presumably two organisms with identical genetic
      > deformities at the chromosomal level must come from one breeding
      > incidence) would positively affect the outcome of species
      > divergence?

      Not so

      "Human chromosome 2 = chimp chromosomes 10 & 11 fused together. I've
      forgotten the exact mechanism by which this happens. I think it might
      be called a Robertsonian transformation. Different chromosome nos. ARE
      NOT necessarily a barrier to interbreeding, BTW. There are species in
      which the chromosome no. is variable, with no impact on fertility."


      Even in humans Mongolism is a split of the chromosome 22 into 2,
      giving Mongoloid children. Not all chromosomal abnormalities are
      infertile. Robertsonian translocation frequently runs in families.

      > Question: so what other solutions are there to the cause behind
      > rising speciation? There are considerably more species today than
      > in the past.

      Again, not so. The number of species world wide has been falling
      since 40,000 years ago, largely as a result of the impact of one
      species - us!



      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor




      Post message: ancient_civilisations@yahoogroups.com
      Subscribe: ancient_civilisations-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      Unsubscribe: ancient_civilisations-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      List owner: ancient_civilisations-owner@yahoogroups.com

      Any questions/comments/files to be uploaded, please do not hesitate to
      contact the moderators.

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
      <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.