PDA

View Full Version : Our Not-So-Distant Cousin


J_Lively
12-27-2002, 06:57 PM
By LISA BROOKS

BETHESDA, Md. — Humans and mice both have hair, five toes on each foot and an affinity for cheese. This month's publication of a draft of the mouse genome shows that genetically, too, we have much in common: 99 percent of our genes are also in mice. We have long known that all living organisms are related to one another genetically, but what does this newfound genetic similarity between humans and mice say about the similarities between any two humans — who are, after all, 99.9 percent the same at the DNA level?

Comparing the genome of humans to that of mice gives us a glimpse into the history of both of our genomes over the 75 million years since we last shared a common ancestor, a species that was a small mammal. One lineage that descended from that species became rodents, and eventually mice, and another became primates — and eventually humans.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/27/opinion/27BROO.html?todaysheadlines

Tentmaker
12-27-2002, 09:00 PM
The CIA rag must have had some space it needed to fill. One can't hardly imagine this propaganda organ giving a sh!t about the similarity of the genomes of humans and rats.

Maybe JL can use this piece to prove the elements of his argument on homosexulity.


Tentmaker

Greg Yasko
05-26-2003, 12:29 PM
Determining genetic similarity based solely on DNA is a falacy.

By the same token the Bible is the same as Shakespeare's works because they're both made of paper and ink. It's the words that matter -- the expression on the page, not the stuff the books are made of.

What geneticists should be looking at is the phenotype, the expression of DNA, and not the genotype, or DNA, alone.

mad dog
05-27-2003, 08:38 AM
Didn't you ever hear of the Micky Mouse club :D :D

Ed Blank
05-29-2003, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by Greg Yasko
Determining genetic similarity based solely on DNA is a falacy.

By the same token the Bible is the same as Shakespeare's works because they're both made of paper and ink. It's the words that matter -- the expression on the page, not the stuff the books are made of.

What geneticists should be looking at is the phenotype, the expression of DNA, and not the genotype, or DNA, alone.

Brilliant. I never thought of that before.