This explains Charlie Crist.
LOL! Richard Burr ...
“Even though some of the genes appear to be important, we still think there is a chance that the Y chromosome eventually could disappear,” said Makova. “If this happens, it won’t be the end of males. Instead, a new pair of non-sex chromosomes likely will start on the path to becoming sex chromosomes.”
been saying for some time that men nowadays especially left wing men are girlie.
I just hope that my daughter will be able to find a guy who is a man when she gets older and not some tip toeing tulip skipper.
Even look around at the men who fought in the second world war and then look at the young men say in Boston.
Big difference.
one is manly the other cares more about how his nails looks, his hair looks and thinks he can give a finger to others while in his car but gets all upset if he is confronted with a promise to break that finger if he ever does it again
So, by admission, science is saying that males are more evolved. This is borne out anthropologically, in other observations, such extended childhood development, long a known trait of species with higher intelligence.
But, in a genuflection before political correctness, this evolution is interpreted as actually not a beneficial mutation, leading to the extinction of males.
You just can’t make this crap up. Round and round it goes.
Wishful thinking to get more man-hating feminazis to read the article.
This needs to be put in context with DNA as a whole. That is, there are some fairly primitive creatures, like some worms, that have far more chromosomes than do more advanced animals and man, but beyond a developmental point, a culling process is used to eliminate “extra” chromosomes.
The logic to this is straightforward. Having more chromosomes means that an organism is more adaptable, but it is harder for it to reproduce its DNA in its offspring. So it’s a trade off.
People probably have too many chromosomes, with the Y chromosome being on the weak end, so it is fading away. Importantly, there is a fairly common genetic problem with the X chromosome as well, called “Fragile X Syndrome”, which might result in it becoming the replacement Y chromosome, while another chromosome takes its place. Literally, an “arm” of the X chromosome could “fall off”, leaving it to look like a Y chromosome.
"Lift up your eyes to the sky, Then look to the earth beneath; For the sky will vanish like smoke, And the earth will wear out like a garment And its inhabitants will die in like manner; But My salvation will be forever, And My righteousness will not wane."Isaiah 51:6
Next the “W Factor” so beloved of birds. With them the Females do all the sex selecting and designating.
Scientists have long suspected that the sex chromosome that only males carry is deteriorating and could disappear entirely within a few million years,
Based on this Barack Obama will declare a crises and claim that health care legislation passed THIS WEEK to solve this problem before it is to late.....
“...some of the surviving genes on the Y chromosome may be essential, which can be inferred because these genes have been maintained for so long.”
By what leap of logic can they assume that lost genes are unimportant and retained genes are important?
But never mind because we have this “Even though some of the genes appear to be important, we still think there is a chance that the Y chromosome eventually could disappear,”
Say what? This article and the underlying research(if this article accurately reflects the research)is utter nonsense. Notice there is no actual proof that there was a X Y split. That is there are no examples of humans ever not having x y chromosomes. The researchers assume this split since there are other mammals that do not have it. Having assumed the split by accepting the assumption that all mammals were at one time had the same chromosomes they go on to the logical assumption that the X and Y chromosomes started with the same number of genes.
Since modern man's Y chromosome has less genes than his X chromosome the genes can assumed to have been lost. Since man has survivied then the logical assumption is that the genes were not important.
And since most of the genes have been lost it is logical to assume that the rest will be lost as well. But oh well, some other chromosome will play that roll...right?
This distorts Darwinian evolution beyond recognition and comprehension.
wouldn’t that be de-evolution ?
|
|
|||
Gods |
To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
“But if you must go, mmmm, I won’t tell ya no,
Just so that we can say we tried.
Tell me you love me for a million years.
Then if it don’t work out...
Then you can tell me goodbye.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMPa7LOosSE
Why are we Deteriorating? Isn’t that kind-of the reverse of what we have in mind (picture thinking) when we were taught evolution?
Oops I forgot, it’s directionless.
Except in the unobservable past when it’s direction was IMPROVING.
For RINOs, its more like a “Why?” chromosome.
Then it becomes the 'Z' chromosone, correct?
Y'know, since you frame it that way, I could almost start believing in evolution.