Study turns human genetics on its head (less monkey...more variations)

Globe and Mail (Canada) ^ | 11/23/2006 | CAROLYN ABRAHAM

[peyton randolph]

...Using new technology to study the genomes of 270 volunteers from four corners of the world, researchers have found that while people do indeed inherit one chromosome from each parent, they do not necessarily inherit one gene from mom and another from dad.

One parent can pass down to a child three or more copies of a single gene. In some cases, people can inherit as many as eight or 10 copies....

[ffusco]

You are wrong. Different breeds of dog are not subspecies of dog, but clearly a Chihuahua is not a Great Dane. Trouble is when trying to determine race that there are no truly pure breeds- to put it bluntly. Put certain stronger characteristics remain and within them are a range of heights and skin colors and eyeshapes as well as a range of diseases and maladies that are somewhat more common.

[Scutter]

The prof mentioned that if both parents were brown eyed, their children would be brown eyed.

Except this is not necessarily true. Using the simplistic model, the blue gene is recessive. So both parents could have brown eyes, but both have a recessive blue gene. The child could then get the blue gene from each parent and have blue eyes. So it doesn't prove the kid was adopted.

[Andrew Byler]

Variations in skin color? Humans are pigmented primarily by melanin.

Birds are distinguished into races within species by differences in standard feather colors. Some mammals are distinguished into races by differences in standard fur color and length. Humans are not different in this regard.

What do you mean by facial type?

The old round vs. long heads is a good starting point.

However, this is not race-based, just as right/left handism, and even blood type is not race-based. Even in cases leaning toward a distinction by people group (race) such as European have around half a chance of being type A bloodtype while the rest of the world is largely type O (along with around half of Europeans).

It could be argued with reason that much of the trend towards more shared characteristics like this comes from prior racial intermixture. It seems likely, for example, that Europeans started off as A- blood type, while non-Europeans started off as O+ blood type. Thousands of years of intermixture have blurred this distinction on the individual level, but not in the aggregate.

The genetic variance of the human race (singular) is not large enough for there to be races of humanity, subspecies or your subgroups (which are one and the same: a subgroup of a species is a subspecies).

I don't see how the outward differences between Africans and Asians, for example, are not enough to classify them as seperate races, while the outward differences between Black Ducks and Mallard Ducks are enough to make them seperate races within one species.

[aruanan]

These self-absoebed pencil-necked scientists/researchers will have a completely different theory/story/explanation in a few years. Just hang on and wait a while, they haven't a clue.

Truisms aren't necessarily true.

[ga medic]

I think it must have been reversed. Maybe she had brown eyes and the parents both had blue eyes. I don't know how this article affects that process, but to my knowledge, there is no way for 2 blue eyed parents to have a brown eyed child.

[Scutter]

I think it must have been reversed. Maybe she had brown eyes and the parents both had blue eyes.

Ok, that makes sense. Poor girl.

[MamaLucci]

My first cousin's parents both had vibrant blue eyes,
she ended up with one blue and one brown.

[editor-surveyor]

Thanks for the ping.

We have genes that we share with many grossly dissimilar creatures, but those genes do not perform the same for us as they do for the others. The genetic code is just not that rudimentary. Evolutionists know that they are deceiving when they make claims based on shared genetic info.

[AndrewC]

Thanks, this is different mention of the topic covered by this thread.

Genetic Breakthrough that Reveals the Differences Between Humans

This thread was, however, posted quite a bit earlier.

[Marie]

My first cousin's parents both had vibrant blue eyes, she ended up with one blue and one brown.

How cool! Sounds like a chimera.

[doc30]

You are right. It was my mistake for posting without enough coffee. I had blue and brown reversed.

[wintertime]

you must have the colors reversed.

The adopted girl must have had brown eyes, and her adoptive parents brown. Two blue-eyed parents can NOT have a brown eyed daughter. Impossible.

Why? The reason is that blue is a recessive gene and the combination of one blue gene with a brown gene yields the dominant color of brown.

[SuzyQue]

I need to read that one. Got a link?

[wintertime]

The adopted girl must have had brown eyes, and her adoptive parents brown.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

that should read: The adopted girl had brown, and the two parents had BLUE. Two blue eyed parent can NOT have a brown eyed daughter.

[Elsie]

I'm sure you have a nice home page, but it doesn't appear correctly on my monitor: text over lapping and images scaled down from big ones that don't fully appear.

[Elsie]

How does this simplistic model explain that?

The mailman?? ;^)

[Elsie]

I once mouthed off and got black eyes!

[Elsie]

Great minds... ;^)

[Elsie]

I just want to know about the gene pool from which Janet Reno came.