Just 2.5% of DNA turns mice into men

NewScientist.com ^ | May 30, 2002 | Andy Coghlan

[scripter]

Ping.

[Poohbah]

Unless the man is Jerry Nadler, whereupon the differential is 0.0000000001%...from "weasel."

[scripter]

Ping.

[scripter]

Unless the man is Jerry Nadler, whereupon the differential is 0.0000000001%...from "weasel."

I sorry, I disagree. It's gotta be closer than that!

[PatrickHenry]

Whose post was #3, and what happened?

[IronJack]

The removal of all or part of the prefrontal lobe of the cerebrum turns a man into a (Democ)rat.

[AndrewC]

Of the 731 genes they located on the mouse chromosome, only 14 did not have a doppelganger in humans. Likewise, there were only 21 genes in the corresponding regions of human DNA that did not turn up in the mouse.

We'll see where this leads. Right now according to those numbers and the one mouse chromosome being analyzed. The difference is just ~2.5% if you divide 35/2 by 731. Suddenly the neighborhood is crowded.

Human brains over chimp

Dramatic differences in gene activity distinguish human and chimpanzee brains, say researchers. The difference may explain our differing behaviour and looks, despite sharing 98.7% of our DNA.

And Craig Venter looks more and more correct in his statement --- My view of biology is 'We don't know shit.' "
Internet posting of article in New Yorker

[Poohbah]

It was Mickey Mouse giving the bird.

Not particularly suited to a family site.

[general_re]

Whose post was #3, and what happened?

I don't know but it disappeared real quick. I was on my way out the door earlier, so I didn't have time to post, but when I caught scripter's ping, it (#5) was the last post on the thread at the time. And #3 was already gone at that point.

It (#3) was posted no earlier than 8:03 PM Eastern, and it disappeared sometime before post #6 was made at 8:09 PM Eastern. But these threads don't get any special scrutiny, no way...

[general_re]

Ha - that'll teach me to jump the gun. If I'd waited another 30 seconds or so, I'd have seen your post ;)

[PatrickHenry]

It was Mickey Mouse giving the bird.

Thanks for the info.

[AndrewC]

It was Mickey Mouse giving the bird.

What's wrong with this?

[ValerieUSA]

I have Matt Ridley's book, Genome .. In the introduction he wrote:
Imagine that the genome is a book.
There are 23 chapters, called chromosomes.
Each chapter contains several thousand stories, called genes.
Each story is made up of paragraphs, called exons, which are interrupted by advertisements called introns.
Each paragraph is made up of words called codons.
Each word is written in letters, called bases.
There are one billion words in the book, which makes it longer than 800 Bibles... This is a gigantic document, an immense book, a recipe of extravagant length, and it all fits inside the microscopic nucleus of a tiny cell that fits easily on the head of a pin.

[AndrewC]

I have Matt Ridley's book, Genome .. In the introduction he wrote:

Good analogy except that it is apparently the advertisements that are the real story. These two different books contain at least one chapter that reads pretty much the same with respect to the paragraphs.

[chaosagent]

Of Mice And Men

[gore3000]

Yes, it is all quite amazing how from so little so much comes out. Some fools think this gigantic book was written by random chance.

[gore3000]

And Craig Venter looks more and more correct in his statement --- My view of biology is 'We don't know shit.' "

Yes, it is funny that each time we think we are close to discovering the secrets of life and the universe we end up finding out that we know less than we ever knew. Until recently we thought that genes were the key to all human functions, now we have found that it is the 95% of DNA which the know-nothing evolutionists had been calling 'junk DNA' is where the real secrets are (and when we find those we surely will find something else even more astonishing that we do not know).

[paix]