| View previous topic :: View next topic |
Boreades
In: finity and beyond
|
|
 |
|
Clarity please. What is it that you refuse to accept?
a) it's well genetically proven
or
b) DNA test companies even offer it as a standard package.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
|
I refer you to the answer I previously gave.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boreades
In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
| Despite going extinct around 40,000 years ago, the genes of Neanderthals are still found in humans today.The exact Neanderthal DNA percentage in H. sapiens varies, depending on a person’s heritage, but is on average around 2%. |
| Genomic sequencing has revealed that non-African populations carry approximately 1–4% Neanderthal DNA, a result of admixture events that took place after modern humans migrated out of Africa. | |
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
| Despite going extinct around 40,000 years ago, the genes of Neanderthals are still found in humans today.The exact Neanderthal DNA percentage in H. sapiens varies, depending on a person’s heritage, but is on average around 2%. |
I don't understand any of this and when I don't understand something it's usually because there's something wrong with it, not me. I'm always being told we have 98% shared genes with chimps (and 31% with pot plants) so having 2% with Neanderthals comes as a bit of a surprise.
| Genomic sequencing has revealed that non-African populations carry approximately 1–4% Neanderthal DNA, a result of admixture events that took place after modern humans migrated out of Africa. |
As you know I am firmly of the 'humans migrated into Africa not out of it' school. However I do not think it will be profitable for you to argue any of this out with me. My ignorance, like my confidence, is invincible. Mind you, I made my name originally with the old A-B-O puzzler. So how do you account for
* the Old World having A,B and O blood alleles
* North America having only A and O and
* South America just O?
If you can, I will cheerfully resign the AEL Chair of Genetics to you.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pete Jones
Site Admin
In: Virginia
|
|
|
|
Yes, the 98% chimp DNA combined with 2% Neanderthal DNA seems wildly inconsistent.
But aren't all DNA stats nonsense? They keep promoting yesterday's "junk" DNA into operative DNA whenever they need to. Google tells me 90-98% is still considered "junk."
Just as "99% of the Universe's matter is dark matter" is an index of ignorance (and arrogance), so is the "98% of DNA is junk" claim.
I think they identify "junk" DNA based on whether they can tell if it makes any difference to the organism, which requires an organism. Since no Neanderthals are around, how would they know which is junk. And if human DNA gets promoted from "junk" to "necessary," then wouldn't all the percentages have to be redone?
Like I ask myself every morning, where is that Minnesota Ice Man corpse when you need it?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pete Jones
Site Admin
In: Virginia
|
|
|
|
Why not start with the assumption that all DNA is operative and continue as though it's your job to discover what it does?
They start by assuming their level of knowledge (i.e., their ignorance) is correct and then pat themselves on the back when they discover that some of the "junk" has function.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it does seem to have had time to work out how to avoid carrying junk around for aeons. Clever stuff, DNA. I had some myself though God only knows where it is now. I've got that much junk of my own. Well, like I'm always saying, you never know when it's going to come in handy.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Coincidentally (unless it isn't) I was sent this today
| academia.edu wrote: | Michael, is this publication yours? Help us keep your profile up to date.
In situ hybridization—Application to gene localization and RNA detection
Michael Harper |
Is 'in situ hybridization' what the rest of us call 'having sex'?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
The Library Index 
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
