It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Men more evolved? Y chromosome study stirs debate

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 01:09 PM

Originally posted by Ausar
so, sociology is not biology; and the mystery is about the y chrome that women lack.
whether or not this(y chrome) is a factor, or a similar factor found in nature, that precludes changes that are spontaneous like caterpillar to butterfly;
two x chromes do not show the observation of y unless the observation of y in man is what is not observed by two x chromes.

Can you turn into a butterfly, or metamorphose in any way whatsoever?
(Balding, shrivelling and developing a beer-gut don't count.)
If not, what is the relevance of this amazing insectoid ability to humans?

If having more chromosomes is a source of superiority, why does Klinefelter's Syndrome cause, on and average, a drop of 15 points in I.Q. and various non-advantageous physical abnormalities?
The more X chromosomes a man has, the lower his I.Q. and the worse the physical abnormalities are.

What does: "two x chromes do not show the observation of y unless the observation of y in man is what is not observed by two x chromes.," mean exactly?

If the Y chromosome confers superiority, why do more males than females suffer from congenital defects?

Do you understand what a mosaicism is and how the female's X chromosome mosaicism confers advantages?

Do you understand the disadvantages to the Y chromosome in not having the opportunity to undergo mitosis, and how this is leading to it shrinking and genes on it atrophying?

There are risks in the specialization of the Y chromosome, however. Besides its absence in females, lack of recombination for most of its physical territory except at its tips, and the strict pattern of paternal inheritance, the solitary cellular existence of the Y chromosome reduces the opportunity for DNA repair, which normally occurs while pairing during mitosis. This may explain the prevalence of multicopy DNA sequences on the Y, and why many of its genes have lost functionality. In fact, while genes predominately specific to male function tend to accumulate on the Y chromosome, other genes that have functional counterparts elsewhere will atrophy over evolutionary time, through the accumulation of uncorrected mutations. Thus the Y chromosome is slowing evolving toward a composition with fewer and fewer essential genes.

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 01:32 PM
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

Wrong. For one redunancy does not cause the effects you are ascribing it.

And... what effects *AM I* describing?

Pray Tell?

And by the way countering fem-nazism with it's opposite is just SILLY at best.

Cold hard facts are the opposite of Fem-nazism?

Very Well, I accept your statement.


[edit on 14-1-2010 by Edrick]

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 01:40 PM
reply to post by Gorman91

Your statement is incorrect, and ignorant of evolution at best. First and foremost, the quantity of your genes does not direct your quality of product.

A. My statement was correct.

Men have more active genetic material, because they have an Active Y chromosome, instead of an Extra Inactive X chromosome.

B. I never claimed that this confers "Quality", as you so put it. That is merely your presumption.

Thus, the argument that men are better than women due to an extra chromosome is debunked.

I Don't remember the part where I said that men were better than women... how about you quote me instead of presuming that you know what I'm thinking?

But it's debunked even if it was true, because the second x chromosome is not turned off. The X chromosome acts as a shield, or sex-linked dominance, over the second one, or sex-linked receive.

Yes, you are saying that the X chromosomes in women are essentially the SAME chromosome, and it can be used to "Back Up" original genetic data.

The Y Chromosome, is DIFFERENT Genetic Code... as opposed to the SAME.

I don't remember refuting this, or making statements to the contrary.

Would you like to quote me?

Thus, if anything, males are weaker as a result of the Y chromosome. This is why males usually get diseases like Hemophilia.

Weaker in what way?

Are you going to qualify your statement, or simply assert that the Gender who has been responsible for FORGING CIVILIZATION is somehow "Weak"?

Seriously, do you even know what you are talking about?


posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 02:16 PM
reply to post by seattletruth

Before men get too impressed with themselves, lead author Jennifer Hughes offers some words of caution: Just because the Y chromosome, which determines gender, is evolving at a speedy rate it doesn't necessarily mean men themselves are more evolved.

From the article quoted by seattletruth.

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 02:23 PM
reply to post by seattletruth

The Y has almost nothing on it. So what.

The Young X phenomena has been examined before.

The X has to be more stable, because it carries just about everything that makes us who we are - male or female.

The Y carries very little about the basic make up of the human body. It has some modifiers in it. It CAN change more.

Further, the X chromosone recombines. The Y does not. The Y changes only through mutation. The X changes in every female, everytime.

(no, not in you males. you get one whole unchanged unrecombined X from your mother. It'll change when you mix it with a woman and have a daughter).

The misrepresentation of what this study means is gross. The fact that so many people are buying it is sad.

There is no "inactive" X in women. That's insane. Some chromosones are active on one X, and some on the other. There is no "inactive X."

Good God people.

[edit on 2010/1/14 by Aeons]

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 02:24 PM
Men with more testosterone have been shown to be nicer and more fair actually.

Originally posted by seattletruth

Originally posted by Ausar
maybe men are only capable of "doing evil" because their growth within the pretext of existing with "degenerates" stunts their ability to do more than.

[edit on 14-1-2010 by Ausar]

Naw. Men are more eager to do evil for 2 reasons:

1. Testosterone.

2. Cause we need to bring home the spoils of war to impress the women.


posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 02:34 PM

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 02:35 PM
reply to post by seattletruth

Men more evolved? Y chromosome study stirs debate


posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 02:39 PM
You two -Eldrick and Kalissa - are arguing two sides of the same damn thing.

A male who survives infanthood must have an X that is prone to better survival because it doesn't have any back up for genetic problems. Success in this model means that the X's chromosones are good enough to get it to reproduction.

There must be fewer problematic errors inherent on the X given by the male's mother to insure survival. A Male's X must be STURDY and ACCURATE.

A female's two Xs do not need to be so specific. They can keep a couple of errors, and perhaps those errors may confer some advantage when found in certain combinations. Their survival of genetics is more ROBUST and INNOVATIVE.

[edit on 2010/1/14 by Aeons]

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 02:48 PM
Its funny but i was thinking about this last night and realized...

The Y chromosome is inherited from the farther obviously, however since theirs only one, the one you inherit is the same as your fathers, and his fathers and so on. I know there is some recombination (I think?) and im thinking rather simply, but im not sure if the Y chromosome goes through it during gamete production...

So effectively if you go back along a family line every male of that line that wasnt introduced from an outside line shares that same Y chromosome. I know its probably wrong on a lot of levels but in a way if you go back far enough wouldnt that mean huge segments of the male populations would share the same Y chromosome?

I mean while with females who inherit 2 X chromosomes, usually from their fathers mother and either of their mothers X chromosomes which she inherited from her mother and her mothers fathers mother (and so on back and back)... basically for the X chromosomes theirs a whole lot of generational genetic line mixing going on since there's 2 possibilities for X from the mother. ie Females are a lot more mixed line wise...

While for a guy you get a single predefined choice for one of yours, the Y... basically the same Y your farther had, and his farther and his farther and so on... there's no 50/50 mixing where a new Y could be introduced. ie if your a guy and your sister has kids any males she bears arent of the same Y so they arent even the same male line as you, unless if you went back far enough that the male lines of the two families ended up coming from the same male, in which case the Y would be related, or maybe even the same.

Not really on topic, and I think my concept may be wrong or very much to simple... not really sure where i was going with it to be honest
now if you go with an idea that humanity shares the same male father at some point (they talk about us all having a common mother, so why not the possibility of us all having the same father)... it could be all male Y chromosomes are related.

Might explain why things like inheritance tended to go down the male line... its alot more intact genetically than the female... possibly.

Okay... I think ill turn my mind off, dont think I made much sense there, or every one will go 'duh of course its like that stupid'

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:19 PM
reply to post by Aeons

There is no "inactive" X in women. That's insane. Some chromosones are active on one X, and some on the other. There is no "inactive X."

Yes... you are technically correct.

It is not ONE WHOLE X that is inactive, but rather bits and pieces of Each that are active.

On the whole, the DOUBLE X chromosomes in the Female genetic code, have the same amount of active genes as the ONE X in the Male Code.

Therefore, Half of the Female XX code is by definition, Inactive, because two genes cannot code the same process at the same time.


posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:24 PM
(this is all the usual case. there are unusual cases.)

There are THREE types of DNA.


mtDNA is the DNA found inside of the mitochondria (an organ) of your cells. It actually has its very own DNA. The mitochondria is like a small cell that is the powerstation of the larger cell.

This outer cell is derived from your mother's ovum. Therefore, this mtDNA is from your mother's. It does not recombine. It changes through mutations over time.

Your mtDNA - your cell's powerstation - is your mother's who is her mother's which is her mother's, etc.

Your cell has a nucleus.

This nucleus contains nuclear DNA. Both X and Y chromosones are nuclear DNA.

A Y chromosone contains information about the androgenizing effects. It says, "You are a male. You produce this much testoterone. Your cells should pick up hormones this way. Your genitals do this. You produce this much human growth hormone. You'll get hair in your ears and nose when you get older."

(I love that last one. Its my favourite. Really, there is a set of instructions on the Y that determines if you get hair in your ears and nose.)

The Y chromosone generally only exists in a male as a single.

The Y chromosone does not recombine. It is transmitted as it is from father to son. It changes by mutation over time.

Your essential physiological blueprint is on the X chromosone. It says things like "You have two eyes. They are here and here. They are this colour. They connect like this to your brain. They have this shape. etc."

A male inherits one complete, unrecombined X from his mother. He inherits one Y from his father. No changes.

A female inherits one X from her father (her paternal grandmother's) and one from her mother.

When these two Xs meet, they unravel and recombine. Therefore every female has two UNIQUE X chromosones. Unlike in a male, neither of her Xs is exactly the same as her parents'.

I'll see if I can find a good powerpoint or something about this for the picture learners.

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:30 PM
Essentially you should realize this.

If your X chromosone was changing that fast, there would be an awful lot of people being born with major physiological problems. The X chromosone holds almost everything that it means to be a human on it. Drastic fast changes on it would not be a good thing for the speicies.

Changes occur essentially methodically. Changes occur in women, where new combinations are tried out, and if they are sturdy enough for survival they will survive when they occur by themselves in a male. You might say males are the hot house that proves out the stability of a small change in the human form.

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:45 PM
reply to post by Edrick

A.) Behind every strong man is a strong woman too. I can barely think of many leaders of the world who weren't married or with a particular woman.

B.) It is not an extra X chromosome. Let's go back to freshman year bio, shall we? Were does one sex chromosome come from? Mommy. Where does the second sex chromosome come from? Daddy. Now unless Mommy and Daddy are clones of each other, brother sister, or twins, (and I'm not saying that it doesn't happen) then the female double X chromosomes are individual genetic traits from each parent. Just as active as any other chromosome. Like any dominate-recessive relationship, SOME genes, but not the whole chromosome, will be deactivated from other genes, but please bare in mind that we all have 2 chromosomes for a reason: ALL chromosomes have dominate-recessive relationships in sections of them. Furthermore, some traits are co-dominate. IE, they're both active. And other traits are completely alone, acting as individual.

Also, ALL genomes are active, btw. Some simply get canceled by others. The body still replicates the, and uses them.

Thus, males and females have around the same genes working. Some males have more, and some females have more. It depends which genes are dominate and which are receive.

Now please, next time you pretend to know biology, do us all a favor and take a course in it first.

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:46 PM
reply to post by seattletruth

Stir up a debate? That is an understatement if I ever heard one. I clicked the source page first, and read the article to my wife and adult son. Then we had a debate. Here is my opinion on this subject matter, and women, please, understand that I am just a man, and know I am no better that you. In many ways women are better than men.

That being said, the facts first:


The complete set of chromosomes in the cells of an organism is its karyotype. It is most often studied when the cell is at metaphase of mitosis and all the chromosomes are present as dyads.
The karyotype of the human female contains 23 pairs of homologous chromosomes:

* 22 pairs of autosomes
* 1 pair of X chromosomes

The karyotype of the human male contains:

* the same 22 pairs of autosomes
* one X chromosome
* one Y chromosome

(A gene on the Y chromosome designated SRY is the master switch for making a male.)

It seems to me that men have both chromosomes, so here is what will happen, in my theory:

As men's X chromosome evolves, it will surely take along the Y chromosome present in the man, and bring this up also. So now X and Y are evolving at the same time, right? In a man, I mean. So, by rearing a daughter, a man does in fact pass this evolvement to a woman. Make sense?

I think this is part of an AGENDA to further strip power from the Feminine. This has been done before, for a good many years, thanks to Romans and Christians and Muslims, who stole the Feminine Power and stamped out most all traces of Goddess worship, even to the point of building Temples and Churches over the smashed remains of former Temples of the Goddess, and those sacred to Pagans. Many women were tortured, burned at the stake, and crushed or hanged because the Holy Church
sanctioned it so, using the old Biblical Eve and the Serpent adventure in the OT creation story, copied from an earlier text, and changed to suit.

During the 1960s, Woman again came to power. they took from men jobs, freedom from dreary home life, equal pay in some cases, the right to vote, and to hold meetings, some became ministers and priests, some sat on the Supreme curt, and one is Head of State, and one Speaker of the house right now. You have come a long way, baby. I think a woman can be elected as president in the very near future.

The AP article article reeks of an agenda to undo all that woman have accomplished in one fell swoop. Personally, I believe very strongly that it will be a woman who saves us all from certain extinction at our own hands, gentlemen. I for one am perfectly happy in my home situation, where the woman has the power, sits at the head of the family, and has the final say in all home and financial things. My wife is my very own personal representation of the Great Mother of us All, and so are all woman, yes, even Lesbians.
The Great Mother gives us all that we need, we live on Her skin, we pump out Her blood to fuel our cars. We cut down Her lungs that provide us with oxygen so that we can clear more land to build cites that reach into the skies. Men are worthless without a woman at their side, She is his Muse, his Inspiration, his Mother, Daughter, Wife, Lover, Grandmother. This cycle would have turned out a whole lot better is women were running things, instead of an old Boys School of men. This is how I feel about it, for what it's worth.

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:52 PM

chromosones aren't even just active or inactive, sometimes the are somewhere inbetween! And these levels of activation can be changed over time!

So you can have a twin, and you can both have the same everything but your RNA may change how your genes are working! And that can be transmitted to your chidren! So you could be an identical twin, and you and your twin could marry identical twins, you could both have only boys, and those boys could all inherent the exact same X from both identical twin mothers, and the exact same Y-DNA from you and your brother .....

and those boys may look different and be different from one another even if they too are as close genetically as twin brothers!

Ah....isn't the world fascinating?

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:55 PM
reply to post by autowrench

how would the trait in the dude pass down in a daughter? males control gender of the child, thus the y can only pass down through a male.

That said, there HAVE been xy women who have had children. And history is filled with men insane with having a son.

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:59 PM
reply to post by Gorman91

A.) Behind every strong man is a strong woman too. I can barely think of many leaders of the world who weren't married or with a particular woman.

Correlation does not imply Causation.

B.) It is not an extra X chromosome. Let's go back to freshman year bio, shall we?

Hey, if that is where you want to drive this debate, all I have to say is "Buckle Up"

Were does one sex chromosome come from? Mommy. Where does the second sex chromosome come from? Daddy. Now unless Mommy and Daddy are clones of each other, brother sister, or twins, (and I'm not saying that it doesn't happen) then the female double X chromosomes are individual genetic traits from each parent.

Yes, but they are the SAME TYPES of traits.

For example, you get Eye color from BOTH X chromosomes... but you cant have 2 different eye colors at the same time.

The information is the same information, it codes for the SAME PROCESS, you could completely remove a WHOLE X chromosome, and you would still be alive, and healthy.

The two Chromosomes code the SAME PROCESSES:

X-1 codes:

Hair Color
Eye Color
Eye position
Nose position

X-2 codes:

Hair Color
Eye Color
Eye position
Nose position

There is no EXTRA genetic code there... it is just more variety for the SAME PROCESSES.

They code the SAME THING... HOW it gets coded is determined by the interaction between the two chromosomes.

But either way, it is still coded.

It is like having Two Textbooks.

They have the same chapters, they spell out the same information in those chapters, etc...

If you pick and chose what sections you will read from what book, the overall FLAVOR of the text is different, but the SUBSTANCE of the text remains unchanged.

You are arguing about the Decorations my dear.


posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 04:19 PM
reply to post by Edrick

Oh boy my dear child, you failed bio again. I present to you my freakish self and my sister. First me, because I'm male, then my sister, who is more of a mystery.

My hair color? Co dominate. Brown from my mother, golden from my father's mother. for every 30 brown hairs, there's one blond. Beautiful indeed. More funny, the brown came in later. I was born blond, but since birth my hair grew browner until it's current ratio.

Eye color? Same. Dark brown with golden streaks. Brown from my mother, eastern euro. golden from my lighter brown eyed father's side, who is blue eyed but carries the trait.

Eye position? Oh boy, this is fun. CO DOMINATE TOO! To my genetic luck, the difference is barely noticeable, but each eye is different. one is slightly different size. In addition, they see different colors. If I look at a pink wall, one sees white, the other sees pink. I only know which eye sees "true" color because I know the difference between black and white, and seeing as that wall is pink, and not white, I can tell the difference. Fun mind games to play though, seeing what each looks blue shifted and red shifted. The difference, again, is minimal. But it's still cool.

Nose? My mother's nostrils, my father's bridge.

Height? co dominate again. I'm exactly the in between number of my grandfather(mom's side) and my father. The exact number in between. Really cool. Though as of late, I've had a sudden post-puberty growth spurt that's given me a tiny but more.

Now as to my sister? The fun begins. Because she's the exact same, only change the ratios. Her hair is very blond, but with the occasional brown stream. Probably 2/3. Here eyes are also different, and are blue with brown-gold streaks. Here height is the exact the in between size of my mother and father.

Now how do you explain that? Obviously both here x chromosomes are controlling these traits. And both my x and y chromosome are controlling these traits.

Now it should be noted that me and my sister are, quite literally, my mother's last eggs. There was a third in between each other who was still born, but both of us were my mother's last before menopause. Thus these odd mutations may just be for us. But still, they happened. And I'm a proud mutant if so.

Sorry dude, but both genes can be turned on. You fail to realize this, and thus failed bio.

Indeed, buckle up. Cause you got summer school.

[edit on 14-1-2010 by Gorman91]

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 04:28 PM
reply to post by Gorman91

Oh boy my dear child, you failed bio again.

Once again, you completely missed my point.

Not only that, your argument is Self Refuting.

Allow me to Explain:

My hair color? Co dominate. Brown from my mother, golden from my father's mother.

Are you implying that you have Two XX chromosomes?

Are you implying that You are Female?

Since we are having a conversation about the effects of One X chromosome upon the other, Your argument (Using yourself as proof) would imply that *YOU* are a woman.

Is this the Case?

Now as to my sister? The fun begins. Because she's the exact same, only change the ratios. Her hair is very blond, but with the occasional brown stream. Probably 2/3. Here eyes are also different, and are blue with brown-gold streaks. Here height is the exact the in between size of my mother and father.

So, you are implying that if she did not have BOTH X chromosomes, than she would have no hair, no eyes, no nose, etc?

My *POINT* (Which you have as yet, failed to grasp) is that One X does not code for anything that the OTHER X *ALSO* does not code for.

Hence, they are REDUNDANT.

Do you know what Redundant means?

The interactions between the two produce differences that may be different that just the one, or the other, but the POINT *IS* that they code for the same processes.


new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in