[blam]

GGG

[BigEdLB]

It proves a certain member of Congress isn’t human as he hasn’t evolved

[married21]

Any other species “self-domesticated “?

[Paladin2]

So what explains Shifty Schiff?

[reasonisfaith]

Is “cuddlier” an example of scientific terminology?

[nickcarraway]

Do I get a treat?

[Pelham]

Cats disagree.

[Rockingham]

This could help to explain the apparent development of modern humans in several regions as protohumans settled in areas with abundant water and potential for agricultural and herding. Such settlement would provide ready and abundant opportunities for self-selection for greater sociability.

[VanShuyten]

Another theory that explains our look is neoteny. That’s the retention of juvenile traits in adults. This theory posits that the same genes responsible for our large brains and the length of time it takes to grow them, are also responsible for our hairlessness, weak nails and teeth and thin skins. I suppose our having puppy faces compared to other species in Homo goes along with that.

[piasa]

So there is hope for the New Communist Man...

[piasa]

Clapper looks pretty tame... floppy ears, flat face....

[LibWhacker]

Cuter and tamer isn't always best.

[Moonman62]

Domesticated animals look different from their wild counterparts as well. Shorter snouts, curly tails, floppy ears and spotted coats are all traits that tend to pop up in domesticated animals. But until recently, no one had an explanation for this “domestication syndrome.”

...

I thought we already knew that it’s a selection of juvenile traits.

[Does so]

Doesn’t explain “Florida Man”.

[PIF]

How does anyone know that we “self-domesticated”? How do we know that we were not domesticated by another race of the human stock like the Neanderthals, the Denisovans?

[neverevergiveup]

"But Zanella and his colleagues’ conclusion is a giant leap from their research on cells growing in laboratory dishes, says Kenneth Kosik, a neuroscientist at the University of California, Santa Barbara. “It’s a very seductive paper,” full of interesting ideas and reams of data, he says. But tying human evolution, domestication and development of facial features together based on the activity of one gene is an overinterpretation, Kosik says. “Those kinds of jumps just don’t belong in a scientific paper.”"

Couldn't agree more, but this is the kind of sensationalism journal editors push for these days.

[Buttons12]

It only has a shelf life of about 12 years, though. Then your adolescents take back their feral heritage.

[BubbaBasher]

Then why do women go for the bad boys?

[Unam Sanctam]

With Democratic criminal non-enforcement policy, we’re going backwards...