It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com 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: 7
6
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 



...no. The daughter would not be smart. Hence why she is your mother.

AHHH SNAP SON!


This is known as an Appeal To Ridicule, it is an argument tactic where the Arguer attempts to insult his opponent, instead of refuting his statements.

IT is often the sign of a weak argument position.

en.wikipedia.org...


HOWEVER, jugs of water have been found dating to this time period, buried underground for storage. Guess who was responsible for fetching the water and berries? WOMEN! Thus while men were innovating and creating tools, women were innovating and creating useful things to.


How do you go from "Women were fetching Berries and Water Pitchers" to "Women invented things"?

This is a logical Fallacy known as "Wishful Thinking" where an arguer makes an assertion according to what they wish to be true, instead of relying on evidence.


And thus, to this day, the man buys the refrigerator, but can never find the orange juice when his wife needs it. lol.


You enjoy insulting yourself, and your gender, don't you?

-Edrick




posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 



Smart isn't associated to the Y.


Citation please.


You are awfully hung up on your descended gonads. Exactly what is it that you think is so astounding about them?


What do you think *ISN'T* Astounding about them?

Seriously... they are MAGICAL!



-Edrick

[edit on 14-1-2010 by Edrick]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Edrick
 


Well not being prideful, I have no care of my gender. What's with gender pride? It makes as much sense as sexual orientation pride and national pride. Be yourself, bro.

Now let's review. It's mid night. Jokes encore. If you took it as an insult, sorry, but I'm really not being serious here, seeing as your argument is not series, but rather amusing. After all, you simply stopped talking about xy chromosomes back where I basically debunked you there.

Ok, so. There's an ice age going on. No more water in Africa, where we are. We're going extinct. Men did not get water. To this day, men do not get water and plants. They hunt, like the bushmen. Men made tools, lances, bows, cages, axes, steel, etc etc. Cause that's their job. To hunt and defend. Women made culture, clothing, storage devices, jewelry, etc etc. Because that was their job, educating and stabilizing the home. In their minds, the capacity to innovate and create was born in both genders. And because the brain's genes are not sex linked, this x2 the brain's development. Men wouldn't make water jugs, and women wouldn't make spears in these days. And don't underestimate this innovation. It was essentially the first form of farming. The idea that putting something in the grown would result in storage would in turn lead to putting a seed in the ground, and in time using the jug of water for watering it. IE, gardening->farming.

So sorry to break your bubble, but men and woman can create and innovate.

As my beloved Chem teacher told me in higshcool, woman come in two brands for math. There's the type who just cross stuff own and do no math, and there's the ones who calculate and do math. Women were encouraged to do the first earlier in the century, so began the lie that women can't do math. Any woman educated in doing math he right way, however, suddenly grows the ability to do math professionally. Don't know about you, but I lost to a girl in my class in grade competitions in math every day. She had a 99 average, I have an 85. booo.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Edrick

Citation please.
[edit on 14-1-2010 by Edrick]


Your balls don't have brains.


excuse me mods, I could not resist.


[edit on 14-1-2010 by Gorman91]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:38 PM
link   
Explanation: S&F!

reply to post by BigfootNZ
 


Explanation: Thanks for denying any ignorance on the genetic state of the embryos etc. BRILLIANT! You earned a St*r!


Personal Disclosure: Insidious?
Uhm Yeah!
Hell hath NO FURY like a Woman $CORNED!


reply to post by Edrick
 


Explanation: They may not have done much beyond creating the 1st profession of prostitution [wiki] [
] AND WHY SHOULD THEY? Even man going to the bloody moon pales in insignificance to that, I would have to say!


Personal Disclosure: Who enslaved who again?
See my Personal Disclosure above for an answer to that!



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 



Well not being prideful, I have no care of my gender. What's with gender pride? It makes as much sense as sexual orientation pride and national pride. Be yourself, bro.


You are not proud of WHAT you are then?


Now let's review. It's mid night. Jokes encore. If you took it as an insult, sorry, but I'm really not being serious here, seeing as your argument is not series, but rather amusing.


Well, I can appreciate that, but a good deal of my arguments have been very serious.


After all, you simply stopped talking about xy chromosomes back where I basically debunked you there.


You mean after I told you that you were arguing against a red herring that your mind invented, as opposed to my actual point?

Yes, I agree.



So sorry to break your bubble, but men and woman can create and innovate.


Well, you can do anything that you put your mind to.... but that still begs the quesiton.

If women are just as capable as men, why are they not "On Top" so to speak?

And don't say "Physical Strength" because that hasn't been a determining factor since we discovered sharp rocks.


Your balls don't have brains.


"Relationship of Testosterone and Nonverbal Intelligence to Hand Preference and Hand Skill in Right-Handed Young Adults"
informahealthcare.com...

-Edrick



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:43 PM
link   
reply to post by OmegaLogos
 



Explanation: They may not have done much beyond creating the 1st profession of prostitution, AND WHY SHOULD THEY? Even man going to the bloody moon pales in insignificance to that, I would have to say!


LOL!


Personal Disclosure: Who enslaved who again? See my Personal Disclosure above for an answer to that!


You are hilarious!

Thanks for the laugh!

-Edrick



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dock9
reply to post by BigfootNZ
 


So what you're attempting to evade conceding is that YES .. FEMALE is the DEFAULT MODE and YES, males COMMENCE as FEMALE

then, after the wash of hormones, the embryo's ovaries DESCEND to become testicles

and the embryo's uterus DESCENDS to become a penis

That's what you meant ?


So in effect, males are modified females

only with their original female genitalia now become external ?


Original is best ... isn't that the adage ?


(Ps. ... and males get the nipples for free .. even though as modified females, they have no use for them in Nature )




No what I was saying was your 'fact' as you put it in your first post was wrong, we start life as being neither and both genders, its not until our hormones begin to affect our body development that our gender path begins... heck if i remeber correctly from a doco I saw a year or so back effectively humans on a mental level are very similar gender wise as children, and that similarity also begins to return once you get into old age... ie the hormones diverge us into gender after childhood, and rediverge us into far more genderless beings in old age.

Outwardly we have the differences, but mentally it takes alot longer to become the gender we are assigned thanks to chance, or in a way its really survival rather than chance... considering that its the male gamete that determines the gender of a baby, basicly which little wiggly gets to the prize first... if at all. Since all the gametes of a female egg are female. The determining difference comes in from the male gamete which can be X or Y... you are either female or male because of your father... hows that a kick in the pants for feminism
your a girl because of your dads contribution


And heres another one, if your a non identical twin, your brother twin (if its a boy) can actual masculinize(sp?) the female fetuses with its testosterone, the mothers own testosterone hormone levels can do similar things as well which can lead to some rather embarrassing deformities not necessarily hermaphrodites but where partial development of the other genders organs happen on some scale.

I also think i once read something that even indicated that past births by your mother can actually have a gender influence on fetuses. Happens in quite a few animals, and it can happen in the opposite direction as well.

As to the fact you seem to still think all fetuses are female at the start...

Sexual differentiation

Effectively all you have at conception and before differentiation as an either soon to be male or female embryo/fetus are:-

Müllerian duct, Wolffian duct and Genital tubercle... which makes you neither male or female... so no, female ISNT the default gender.

As mentioned on the wiki entry for Hermaphrodites under the "Other uses of terms" section...



Sigmund Freud (based on work by his associate Wilhelm Fliess) held fetal hermaphroditism to be a fact of the physiological development of humans. He was so certain of this, in fact, that he based much of his theory of innate sexuality on that assumption. Similarly, in contemporary times, fetuses before sexual differentiation are sometimes described as female by doctors explaining the process.[4] Neither concept is technically true. Before this stage, humans are simply undifferentiated


So again... female is not the default at conception, how can it ever be logically when a female requires XX and most if not all male embryos have XY at conception, they MAY look female to the ill informed but they are nothing BUT male at the most basic level which matters... ie the genetic one.


[edit on 15-1-2010 by BigfootNZ]



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 04:57 AM
link   
reply to post by sos37
 


you are an embarrassment to your sex.


Now, you have linked crime states in terms of sex- would you be so brave to do the same with race, or is it only when it suits your sad little agenda.


Grow a set and get off your knees, and you can make me a cuppa



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder
reply to post by sos37
 


you are an embarrassment to your sex.


Now, you have linked crime states in terms of sex- would you be so brave to do the same with race, or is it only when it suits your sad little agenda.


Grow a set and get off your knees, and you can make me a cuppa


Yeah, whatever. I won't be the one receiving a Darwin award anytime soon, pal. You on the other hand... the clock is ticking.



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by sos37
 


you remain silent on your use of crime figures to justify your sexism, would you do likewise for crime figures in terms of race?


Milk, no sugar, there is a dearie



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder
reply to post by sos37
 


you remain silent on your use of crime figures to justify your sexism, would you do likewise for crime figures in terms of race?


Milk, no sugar, there is a dearie


Hey genius, race has nothing to do with this discussion. The topic is gender. The fact that you want to twist this into a racial issue that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand reeks of desperation. You really aren't very intelligent are you?



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by sos37
 


Your "evidence" consists of the fact that men are more likely to commit a crime, to you this is evidence of the "nasty" men who are violent- why do you not use the same silly little rationale for race, crimes are broken down by race as well


You would be doing acrobating in your self hating lilly livered mind, wouldn't you dearie



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by blueorder
 


Awww face it. The facts corroborate what I was saying and you're desperate to twist this into something it isn't. Run along now and do something you clearly are qualified for, like eat a good book or smell the tires on your car. There's a good dog.



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 10:48 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 01:22 PM
link   
From Amos and Hardwood (1998) Factors affecting levels of genetic diversity in natural populations published by Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society as referenced by Matt Ridley's "Genome":

"It is not often that you find language like this in one of the most sober and serious of all scientific publications. 'The mammalian Y chromosome is thus likely to be engaged in a battle in which it is outgunned by its opponent. A logical sequence is that the Y should run away and hide, shedding any transcribed sequences that are not essential to its function'.

'A battle', 'outgunned', 'opponent', 'run away'? These are hardly the sort of things we can expect molecules of DNA to do. Yet the same language, a little more technically phrased, appears in another scientific paper about the Y chromosome, entitled The enemies within: intergenomic conflict, interlocus contest evolution (ICE), and the intraspecific Red Queen. (Rice and Holland-1997-Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology)

The paper reads, in part: 'Perpetual ICE between the Y and the rest of the genome can thereby continually erode the genetic quality of the Y via genetic hitchhiking of mildly deleterious mutations.'"

In other words: Genes that benefit females and are harmful to males collect on the X chromosome. Same with the Y chromosome collecting genes that benefit males and are harmful to females. However, when you crunch the numbers you find a decided X chromosome advantage.

Females have XX, males have XY, so 75% of all sex chromosomes are X. The X chromosome has the home field advantage since it can spend more of it's time "attacking" the Y chromosome by evolving abilities/mutations that the Y chromosome can not counter defend. This results in the Y chromosome ridding itself of as many genes as it can or turning them off in order to "run away and hide" so that there are fewer targets for the X chromosome genes to hit.

Partial list of X-linked diseases in which females are carriers yet (mainly) males get the disease:

Chronic granulomatous disease (CYBB) · Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome · X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency · X-linked agammaglobulinemia · Hyper-IgM syndrome type 1 · IPEX · X-linked lymphoproliferative disease

Hematologic
Haemophilia A · Haemophilia B · X-linked sideroblastic anemia

Endocrine
Androgen insensitivity syndrome/Kennedy disease · KAL1 Kallmann syndrome · X-linked adrenal hypoplasia congenita

Metabolic
amino acid: Ornithine transcarbamylase deficiency · Oculocerebrorenal syndrome
dyslipidemia: Adrenoleukodystrophy
carbohydrate metabolism: Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency · Pyruvate dehydrogenase deficiency · Danon disease/glycogen storage disease Type IIb
lipid storage disorder: Fabry's disease
mucopolysaccharidosis: Hunter syndrome
purine-pyrimidine metabolism: Lesch-Nyhan syndrome
mineral: Menkes disease

Nervous system
X-Linked mental retardation: Coffin-Lowry syndrome · Fragile X syndrome · MASA syndrome · X-linked alpha thalassemia mental retardation syndrome · Siderius X-linked mental retardation syndrome

eye disorders: Color blindness (red and green, but not blue) · Ocular albinism (1) · Norrie disease · Choroideremia
other: Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease (CMTX2-3) · Pelizaeus-Merzbacher disease · SMAX2

Skin and related tissue
Dyskeratosis congenita · Hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia (EDA) · X-linked ichthyosis · X-linked endothelial corneal dystrophy

Neuromuscular
Becker's muscular dystrophy/Duchenne · Centronuclear myopathy (MTM1) · Conradi-Hünermann syndrome

Urologic
Alport syndrome · Dent's disease · X-linked nephrogenic diabetes insipidus

No primary system
Barth syndrome · McLeod syndrome · Simpson-Golabi-Behmel syndrome
Source


The SRY is a powerful male counter that another poster alluded to in the masculinization of the embryo (and the main difference between human and chimpanzee evolutionary differences). There is also the anti-Mullerian hormone, a masculinizing agent. There is some indication that these episodes of masculinization are being countered in the womb. Once a son is conceived, the womb basically sends out a message saying "No more males" which tends toward most miscarriages being male. source

If any other males do manage to be conceived, they have a greater tendency toward feminization. There is indication that birth order of the male, more than any other determining factor, even more than Xq28 (a region on the X chromosome), dominant mothers/distant fathers, older sisters, etc. has been shown to be the most likely determinant of male homosexuality (does not apply to lesbians). [See the works of Dean Hamer, Bogaert, and others].

During hard times, an abundance of females is a safer evolutionary bet. Fewer males are needed to impregnate females and females respond by producing more females and less males.
source

Men's testosterone levels are in decline, also leading to health risks for men as well as reduced ability (or desire) to reproduce.
source

Sperm counts are declining.
source

I'll leave you with this articles' summary:
Y Chromosomes Had Problems From the Start

Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes packed with genes that dictate every aspect of our biological functioning. Of these pairs, the sex chromosomes are different; women have two X chromosomes and men have an X and a Y chromosome. The Y chromosome contains essential blueprints for the male reproductive system, in particular those for sperm development.

But the Y chromosome, which once contained as many genes as the X chromosome, has deteriorated over time and now contains less than 80 functional genes compared to its partner, which contains more than 1,000 genes. Geneticists and evolutionary biologists determined that the Y chromosome's deterioration is due to accumulated mutations, deletions and anomalies that have nowhere to go because the chromosome doesn't swap genes with the X chromosome like every other chromosomal pair in our cells do.

source



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Edrick
 


No, I did a pretty good example such as my sister whereby both Xs are active and co dominate. Neither is inactive.

Also, the reason women have not innovated is simply you ignoring places where they did. Most inventions were team-based, with teams of people working. And many of those teams had men and woman talking about it. As I recall, before his divorce, Eisenstein loved talking to his wife about his theories and she helped him figure stuff out. Of course, he was "a playa" and as such, that relationship could not work.

In addition, men like John Adams contributed to the fundamentals of Republican government with the aid of his wife. A good speech from his wife, titled something like "remember the ladies" is essentially the earliest call for equality in the nation. The fact is that John Adams worked with his wife to create the fundamentals that allowed the US government to prosper so young. Men like George Washington were unable to live without the moral and philosophical support of their wives, whereby they would have become evil old men who would be dictators. How perfect that they died so close together, seeing as without each other, there was no point in living.

In fact, numerous presidents have pointed to their wives as the final decider of what they were going to do, seeing as they could not make the decision alone.

The fact that historic books recorded only one man as inventing something, or just a small group of people as creating something, does not negate the men and women around these few who did the real hard work and organization of those events and inventions. Failing to contribute Ben Franklin's family as a source of motivation for him is simply foolish. Likewise, failing to realize all those women in those great men's lives as a source of motivation and aid is also foolish. Only recently has it been the social norm to allow women to get an education, let alone take credit. And low and behold, suddenly there's an exponential growth in women inventors and leaders.

Here's a fact. Humanity doesn't change. Math is a universal truth. Math graphs humanity as an exponential species, developing exponential. So when part of humanity suddenly cuts and creates a noncontinuous graph, something is wrong. Graphing in the modern era shows rates of intelligence equal to men. As such, I take modern rates far more than the rags of historic recordings in the past, who forget to mention so much more.



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 01:34 PM
link   
And naturally bald men are even more evolved. It is no coincidence that most reports of advanced alien beings are bald.

Any fine looking ladies looking to advance the species should focus on us baldies!



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Some more copypasta for ya to ruminate on. It's from DarwinAwards.com.

There are so many men gracing the pages of the Darwin Awards, and so few women, that everyone wonders if there is an innate gender bias. Or is Wendy biased against men? There were so few women contenders that I had to drop a planned chapter on "Femme Fatalities." The cause of the disparity is unknown.

Smakee offers an interesting theory: "I just might be able to answer the mystery that the vast majority of Darwin Awards contenders are male. I've studied evolution, and there is an academic theory that males are, in a sense, evolution's playthings. Far fewer males than females are needed to propagate our species. Males can therefore be used as an experimental breeding ground, as we are more dispensable. In most species females tend to be close to the average in physical and mental dimensions, whereas males are seen to display extremes more frequently. With human intelligence this also seems to be the case, as there are many more male geniuses, though this may also be due to the sexism rampant in our societies. On the other end, there are also many more idiots, who often end up qualifying for the Darwin Awards."

edit to add that testosterone levels are declining but testosterone is an immune system killer. It's a catch-22: higher testosterone levels weaken the immune system making it more difficult for sickly males to reproduce but lower testosterone levels increase risk of heart disease and prostate cancer also making it more difficult for sickly males to reproduce.

[edit on 15-1-2010 by whitewave]



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 02:11 PM
link   
There is almost nothing on the Y.

You can look up what is currently found on it. Intelligence isn't one of those things.

Now, I saw later that you addressed the function of testosterone on intelligence and skill

There has been some studies on this.

However, women have testosterone as well in smaller amounts. Women are more sensitive to testosterone, therefore less means more.


Genes on the Y

ghr.nlm.nih.gov...=Y/show/Genes

The Y chromosone is most distinctive in the fact that is has few genes, and in changing over time it loses MORE genes.

Because most of what is on it isn't essential for survival. It essential for REPRODUCTION.


Originally posted by Edrick
reply to post by Aeons
 



Smart isn't associated to the Y.


Citation please.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join