Posted on 01/23/2006 4:31:58 PM PST by PatrickHenry
Scientists at the Georgia Institute of Technology have found genetic evidence that seems to support a controversial hypothesis that humans and chimpanzees may be more closely related to each other than chimps are to the other two species of great apes – gorillas and orangutans. They also found that humans evolved at a slower rate than apes.
Appearing in the January 23, 2006 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, biologist Soojin Yi reports that the rate of human and chimp molecular evolution – changes that occur over time at the genetic level – is much slower than that of gorillas and orangutans, with the evolution of humans being the slowest of all.
As species branch off along evolutionary lines, important genetic traits, like the rate of molecular evolution also begin to diverge. They found that the speed of this molecular clock in humans and chimps is so similar, it suggests that certain human-specific traits, like generation time, began to evolve one million years ago - very recently in terms of evolution. The amount of time between parents and offspring is longer in humans than apes. Since a long generation time is closely correlated with the evolution of a big brain, it also suggests that developmental changes specific to humans may also have evolved very recently.
In a large-scale genetic analysis of approximately 63 million base pairs of DNA, the scientists studied the rate at which the base pairs that define the differences between species were incorrectly paired due to errors in the genetic encoding process, an occurrence known as substitution.
"For the first time, we've shown that the difference in the rate of molecular evolution between humans and chimpanzees is very small, but significant, suggesting that the evolution of human-specific life history traits is very recent," said Yi.
Most biologists believe that humans and chimpanzees had a common ancestor before the evolutionary lines diverged about 5-7 million years ago. According to the analysis, one million years ago the molecular clock in the line that became modern humans began to slow down. Today, the human molecular clock is only 3 percent slower than the molecular clock of the chimp, while it has slowed down 11 percent from the gorilla's molecular clock.
This slow down in the molecular clock correlates with a longer generation time because substitutions need to be passed to the next generation in order to have any lasting effect on the species,
"A long generation time is an important trait that separates humans from their evolutionary relatives," said Navin Elango, graduate student in the School of Biology and first author of the research paper. "We used to think that apes shared one generation time, but that's not true. There's a lot more variation. In our study, we found that the chimpanzee's generation time is a lot closer to that of humans than it is to other apes."
The results also confirm that there is very little difference in the alignable regions of the human and chimp genomes. Taken together, the study's findings suggest that humans and chimps are more closely related to each other than the chimps are to the other great apes.
"I think we can say that this study provides further support for the hypothesis that humans and chimpanzees should be in one genus, rather than two different genus' because we not only share extremely similar genomes, we share similar generation time," said Yi.
Even though the 63 million base pairs they studied is a large sample, it's still a small part of the genome, Yi said. "If we look at the whole genome, maybe it's a different story, but there is evidence in the fossil record that this change in generation time occurred very recently, so the genetic evidence and the fossil data seem to fit together quite well so far."
"Dear me, I believe I am becoming a god. An emperor ought at least to die on his feet." Vespasian (9-79 AD), Roman emperor
"Either that wallpaper goes, or I do." Oscar Wilde (1854-1900), British dramatist. As he lay dying in Paris.
General Sedgwick at the Battle of Spottiswood: 'They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist...'
Socrates: “Crito, we owe a cock to Aesculapios.”
«Ne touchez pas a la verdure.» - George Sand
>[Re: Jesus} "Even though you won't admit it. At least not now. maybe someday."
Truer words have never been spoken.
There is more to life than evolution.
Yeah -- it was tough to find a stupider (yet amusing) post
The strong force? I'm not a physicist, so RWP or RA, can you help? Is this what he's talking about?
But its late and I haven't shaved. In the field tomorrow so good night all.
===> Placemarker <===
The best I can find is that Voltaire actually said, «Adieu, mon cher Morand, je me meurs.»
Yes, TODAY, especially with everything that is going on with Israel and Iran, I'm surprised we're still here- ha
Good night to you too, sir.
We need some kind of rule -- all the CRIDers have retreated to scripture, since any fact-based and logic-based arguments are getting hammered and their lies and libel exposed.
I guess when they all go to Scripture, the thread is pretty well over.
No, when Jesus preached, he never ran into people's house, grabbing them my the throat and preaching to them. He walked near a village, and people would flood out to hear Him.
No one is forced to hear the Bible. Go into any public school, and show me a Bible--good luck finding one. Then show me Origin of Species.
>ARe you one of those who long to see a half-bear, half gecko or something?
According to evolution we should, but we ain't never seen them.
He doesn't know the strong force from his right ear. He's made up his mind, don't confuse him with facts.
Boy, the trolls on this thread are even stupider than usual. Must be the title that attracted them. They saw 'chimp' and thought 'news from the kinfolk'.
I've recently thought that the tactic of a creationist completely changing the subject to religion when they've run out of (or never had any) arguments based upon science should be given a formal term.
PT Barnum's last words--
“How were the receipts today at Madison Square Gardens?”
(one of my faves) :)
YEC INTREP
Are you ever going to provide evidence for your claim that Darwin recanted on his deathbed?
In Colossians 1:16-17 we read this in reference to Jesus Christ: "For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together." All things were created by Christ and for him, and in him all things cohere (the elements)
Not on this thread yet, until someone mentions the fact that Darwin recanted and asked God for forgiveness in his last hours. Until then, my lips are sealed on this historical fact.
So in spite of the fact that Darwin's daughter publically wrote that Darwin did not in fact recant on his deathbed, you will continue to peddle the lie that he did and that his children testified as much when asked, right? You will openly lie when asked.
Thanks for admitting that you're a liar.
Amazing, isn't it? Time to bookmark this post - it's rare when the creationists actually admit that they're willing to lie in the service of their cause.
Then again, maybe they don't consider it a lie if they only lie to infidels.
>Way back up the thread you admitted you are not a scientist. You know, I believe you!
No, I'm not a scientist, thank God.
You believe me now, but you didn't believe me earlier, though, when I made that truthful statement, didn't you? I speak the Gospels.
When did Krishna, Buddha or Dr Suess ever grab anyone by the neck? And people certainly streamed out of their houses to hear and see Buddha. And Krishna is a whole different type of theology. Your strawman falls, even when we are off topic.
Dear Lord, can't you CRIDers be honest about anything?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.