GGarbo
| | Joined: 10/8/2007
Msg: 26 | |
| | Us and our ancient ancestors. Are our genes capable of remembering them?Page 2 of 2 (1, 2) | We have a lot of dormant genes that are there for survival purposes so at one time...served a purpose. ADHD is a good example of that. They call it the Hunter Gene because during Hunter/Gatherer times, many of the traits which are disruptive in a Agricultural society, actually served to benefit survival.
Being distracted by your environment, when you have to be aware of it all the time, was beneficial to us at one point. With a changing environment, it makes sense that we would instead turn these Genes off rather than totally get rid of them incase we needed them again. | |
|
| Us and our ancient ancestors. Are our genes capable of remembering them?
Posted: 3/15/2010 2:12:53 PM | 'John'..//It is pretty much discredited, but illustrates that even the human embryo has transient stages which express features not usually present in the mature foetus or adult. At some stages, human embryos have gills and tails//
I would fell honoured if you'd give a 'personal' take on what your saying John. | |
|
| Us and our ancient ancestors. Are our genes capable of remembering them?
Posted: 3/15/2010 3:25:52 PM | Yes, there are genetic 'misfires' like the fetal tail. There is a strict genetic code, yet at inception, an in certain environments, it can be 'tweaked' and will alter the genetic outcome. Normally, there is a genetic recombinance that governs the outcome.
There are many factors like dominant and recessive traits- the combination of both of either of these introduces many inherent factors ( or non-inherent) that can produce
a genetic anomaly.
That's the brief answer. :) | |
|
| Us and our ancient ancestors. Are our genes capable of remembering them?
Posted: 3/15/2010 3:51:01 PM | I would fell honoured if you'd give a 'personal' take on what your saying John.
I'm no major expert on evolution, but I'll give it a shot. The Wiki Recapitulation Theory page does a pretty good job. In it, you will see an illustration emphasizing the similarities of the human embryo to adult versions of creatures considered to be lower on the evolutionary tree. Specific examples include fish, salamander, tortoise, chicken, hog, calf and human. Another interesting and informative account is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Haeckel. Basically, the idea was that embryonic appearance went through a sequence of development which resembled adult forms of more primitive species. This is now known not to be the case, although the basic observation that triggered the theory is still firmly accepted. That is that embryos of many different species share common characteristics which may or may not be expressed in later development. It is my impression that the study of how such features develop or disappear in different embryos provides clues about how particular features may have evolved. Thus, human 'gills' develop to a certain stage in the embryo, then diverge from gill development into formation of the ears, jaw and throat. Are we remembering the gills of our distant ancestors? Whale embryos develop legs, reminiscent of their earlier mammalian ancestors, then lose them. It shouldn't be surprising that we are also able to suppress genes which may express things like ADHD which may have served our ancestors well. In that sense, our genes carry some of our ancient history in them, although it may not contain all of the details of our journey to this point in time.
Take a look at http://www.embryo.chronolab.com/external_main.htm and maybe explore from the homepage if you're interested. You can see the "tail" in the week 4 human embryo and also the pharyngeal arches in the neck region. These develop into the gills of fish, but undergo more complex differentiation in mammals (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharyngeal_arch), forming parts of the ear, mouth and throat.
As has been noted, some features develop and then are removed, such as human tails and whale legs. These are often known as 'vestigial' characteristics. The appendix, tail and wisdom teeth are a few described in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigiality. Sometimes the control of these attributes goes wrong, producing 'congenital disorders' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congenital_disorder). Human tails may be considered a relatively benign congenital disorder.
Not sure if any of that will help. | |
|
| Us and our ancient ancestors. Are our genes capable of remembering them?
Posted: 3/15/2010 4:37:01 PM | 'Quietjohn2'..//Not sure if any of that will help//
@ John
Your 60 years old... And you attack a subject as if you were 18.
.... When you think your not helping; slap yourself on the wrist :)... Because what you add isn't found easily from door to door... Believe me... I pay attention. | |
|
| |
| |
| Us and our ancient ancestors. Are our genes capable of remembering them?
Posted: 3/15/2010 5:12:35 PM | 'Tall'... Your British mate...
Make your point and elaborate.. Then someone can come back at you.... If your looking for conflict.. I'll accommodate you.
LOL your british mate , i like that ... bloody hell dont remind me ...
i just thought the theory that our human devoloping embryo was proven to not go through stages of the lesser animals in its develpoment . ie we dont have gills that then become ears . ?
come back with your weapons blazing you british **** lol
in a david brent way ofcourse ... | |
|
| Us and our ancient ancestors. Are our genes capable of remembering them?
Posted: 3/15/2010 8:13:04 PM |
wasnt Haeckel's Ontogeny Recapitulates Phylogeny theory proven wrong years ago
Yep, but some textbooks are still featuring his drawings. He is the "Piltdown" man of genetics.
The pharyngula stage of development does include a tail and rudimentary gills (actually pharyngeal pounches, I believe, is the proper terminology), and is the stage where all vertebrate embryos show similarity.
Cheers | |
|
Home
login 
