New-found gene separates man from apes

[really?]

The University of Edinburgh team says it's the first time that a new gene - carried only by humans and not by apes - has been shown to have a specific function within the human body.
More: http://www.tgdaily.com/general-sciences ... -from-apes

[Twain Shakespeare]

From the article...
"Most differences between species occur as a result of changes to existing genes, or the duplication and deletion of genes. But this one, it seems, emerged fully functional out of non-coding genetic material, previously termed 'junk DNA', in a surprisingly short time."

Lamarkian evolution? Reprogramming from Panspermia? Chemically induced mutation from hallucinogenic apples?

[SydneyPSIder]

[Arouet]

Too lazy to look up links right now but there has been a lot of work recently on the "junk dna" that doesn't look quite as junky as previously thought.

[Twain Shakespeare]

Several crashes ago,I tried to reccommend "Factoring Humanity", an sf novel by Robert Sawyer about the discovery that the Junk contains instructions for triggering mutations. Within the book, a cloned Neandethal and one of the first telepaths provide the comparisons that help the discovery come about. The villain is Ivan the Terrible, who founded a hugely successful medical insurance co that stays in the black by killing clients who are high risk. In that context, it has a lengthy examination of the ethics of judging people in anyway based on their genetics. Excellent read.

[SydneyPSIder]

Here's a copy that isn't blocked by a paywall:

http://stirling-westrup-tt.blogspot.com ... early.html

I don't buy those theories too much, with the exception of the advantage of the systemising gene -- which can be connected to autism. (I believe autism is caused more by encephalitis and other things that can go wrong at a young age, i.e. it is a developmental disorder, but there is a latent genetic predisposition.)

An alternative theory is not that people used to be more tolerant (I don't believe they were in all likelihood), and that certain types of mental illness were advantageous, but that man's growing brain and abilities lead groups to be able to acquire much greater surpluses and survive even with mental illness in their midst. i.e. mental illness has poorer survival prospects, but the increased teamwork of communities, the ability to control nature and the environment to a greater and greater extent, fend off predators, etc etc meant that the usual Darwinian 'survival of the fittest' arguments were less important, and that weaker genes could survive. Further, as man's consciousness and intelligence is far more evolved than most or all other animals, then how does that new form of consciousness manifest itself? The heightened levels of cognition, self-awareness, inventiveness, problem-solving etc may also have produced much more elaborated instances of mental illness than you would see in animals. And almost as a number of silicon chips off a silicon wafer have defects under testing, the new capabilities may have evolved so quickly that there is also a high defect rate.

But I believe, just looking at ppl today, that they have always been grossly intolerant of difference, including towards other races. I believe the Neanderthals were wiped out by warfare from Homo sapiens also, not that they were 'out-competed'. I think Homo sapiens' inbuilt xenophobia and aggressiveness and warlike nature means they would attack and kill any other hominid tribe they encountered, unless that tribe were stronger and more able to defend itself. We also see this pattern with the emergence of kingdoms and empires, from the very earliest period of recorded history.

Last edited by SydneyPSIder on 27 Mar 2014, 15:24, edited 1 time in total.

[Scepcop]

So how do evolutionists like Richard Dawkins explain this gene in mankind that is not in primates?

[SydneyPSIder]

[Emily]

Frankly, I can't trust anything in this article. All too often, media completely misinterprets the results and/or purpose of scientific studies. This site didn't even have the basic courtesy to post the doi or other identifying information for the research.