Bucky_McLachlan wrote...
This is pure rubbish, you're bringing information into the argument that has nothing at all to do with the argument being made. Genetic variance in human beings for isntance has very little to do with how complex our DNA is.
You obviously missed the class on what genetic variance even is if that's what you're bringing the argument down to.
Here's some science for you sparky. Genetic variance is what allows a species to adapt in beneficial ways over time. It results from several factors, it is influence by several main criteria including genetic mutation and elimination of recessive characteristics and the addition of dominate ones. It has precisely d*ck to do with how complex an organisms dna is. If genetic variance has not occured in ways that make the organism more capable of survival than whatever mutations have occured mean nothing at all and evolution has not occured.
"
Genetic variability is different from
genetic diversity (or genetic variation) in a way that the former measures how much the trait or the genotype will tend to vary whereas the latter measures the number of the actual variation of species in a population. Compared with genetic diversity, genetic variability is more difficult to measure. At the molecular level, genetic variability may be measured by determining the rate of mutation."
Not only are you getting your definitions for genotype and phenotype mixed up, you don't understand the difference between genetic variability and genetic diversity either. Just because certain organisms develop different diseases or are "weaker" than others (whatever that means to you) doesn't mean anything unless you've sequenced the genomes of each one yourself and compared them.
It's fairly clear by now that humans didn't start diverging genetically until very late in the timeline of life existing on Earth, putting them at a major disadvantage in genetic variability compared to other species. At the same time, that low mutation rate also means a high survival rate for each individual human, which you seem to be confusing as "rapid mutation makes humans stronger than everyone else, therefore I am correct". Thus, your argument is actually backwards -- being born with several abnormalities means mutation is occurring at a very rapid rate. While this is bad for the individual organism, it is beneficial for the species as a whole (assuming there are beneficial mutations that arise). The reason it's not so evident with humans and the reason why you're scrambling your argument is because our species is very focused on raising a minuscule number of healthy offspring. A lot of potential offspring do not survive in the womb and are selected against already.
Human DNA has several methods of preventing mutations from occurring, which results in
less genetic variation in the long run. Single-celled organisms, viruses and bacteria (and some plants) - organisms that don't have as many failsafes, have much more genetic variability and a higher mutation rate than humans.
Keep copying and pasting random sh*t to make yourself sound smarter than you are though if you must. 
Of course, you're the one who keeps disagreeing with everyone else, even in the face of obvious evidence that you still don't bother to read or accept.
I'm impressed. You're very skilled at being an uninformed troll. Your constant arguing with everyone else -- whether it is specific Mass Effect characters, Star Wars critique or genetics -- just further solidifies that fact. Because of people like you, I don't just sound more intelligent, I
know I am.
And I also know that you contribute absolutely nothing to this thread (or the forum itself) other than cynical, condescending arguments full of latent bitterness and misinformation, so I (and everyone else here) can be entirely certain of being on the winning side of the argument whenever you're posting.
7382948128212060
Modifié par Ecael, 30 juin 2010 - 09:10 .
Retour en haut
