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.

 

Human evolution: A simple calculation indicates that human evolution may have been turbo charged !

page: 4
31
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 07:55 AM
link   
When we assume we know everything, we stop learning.
When we assume we have all the answers to all the questions and that those that question are ignorant, our arrogance and prejudice has us as a self important god.

I think the points are valid, I think the questions are valid.
I've often wondered why only humans advanced at such rates?
Why not all life forms?

S&F




posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 08:16 AM
link   
reply to post by HappilyEverAfter
 




I've often wondered why only humans advanced at such rates?
Why not all life forms?


They did. They are.

Especially the microbes - think of them as a vanguard and a primary mechanism of evolution along with prions (which also "evolve"). ....As it happens, prions and microbes mutate, adapt and evolve first, then they "infect" more complex organisms, and bring them into "harmony" with the larger environment.

It's helpful to think of yourself as a "super-organism" in order to better understand evolution.



Some scientists have suggested that individual human beings can be thought of as "superorganisms"; as a typical human digestive system contains 1013 to 1014 microorganisms whose collective genome ("microbiome") contains at least 100 times as many genes as our own [12]

(see also Human microbiome project).



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyInTheOintment
What a pleasure to read of a conversion from atheism! I read Narby's "Cosmic Serpent" too - in fact, it's in my top ten books relating to anthropology/ archaeology/ origins of humanity. Haven't read Hancock's "Supernatural", but will check it out now following your 'recommendation'. All the best for the New Year.

To be honest, Hancock's book references Narby's. I'm not sure there's much additional DNA-related material in Supernatural, in excess of what there is in The Cosmic Serpent. Supernatural is about Shamanism, evidence of a spirit world, plant-based hallucinogens and the idea of a supernatural force having influenced the unlikely materialisation of DNA and life on Earth. Still an excellent read that I certainly would recommend.

All the best.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


AHA! and BINGO!

...I have had similar experiences and pretty much agree with your assessment. ...My hypothesis is that viral infections trigger latent infections in the blood vessel walls and thereby, TIA's or mini-strokes - the increased brain power results from the "healing / rebuilding process" creating new neuronal and other pathways.


[I could go on about it, but that's the nutshell.]



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by soficrow
 


I believe that viral infections are a big part of what causes the unruly human-ape to become somewhat civilized. I mean, we learn as well.

But another experience: my son contracted H1N1 during the big "scare". He was in the hospital for 5 days (the same time we had tickets to go see Metallica in San Antonio...which we begrudgingly cancelled and gave the tickets away). Before this hospitalization he was a different child than he is now. The change is almost so gradual that you couldn't see it.

Always bright and inquisitive, he was the social butterfly of the class. He was ALWAYS in trouble for talking, etc. Then he just quit being like that. He is more insightful now (he recently made his own ATS login, and is still lurking), keeps to himself more, and is much more family oriented than before. And it has been a little over a year since he had school trouble, other than when he pummeled a kid that had hit him (at 12, he is larger than most full grown men).

There is something that happens after severe viral infections that changes people. Look at what happened after the 1912 epidemic: the world literally changed overnight. I think the Spanish Flu represents a major genetic upload.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


actually, were told theres 2 forms of evolution.
the slow and gradual process and occasionally it goes by leaps and bounds.

Another thing that you are not taking into consideration is that it is not just 1 organism that is evolving. Every organism on the planet has the chance to bring about a useful evolution.

In all honesty, i think you just dont fully understand evolution and thats why your having a hard time figuring this out.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 09:09 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 




There is something that happens after severe viral infections that changes people.


Yes, there is. You think it's often beneficial - I agree, and add that infection is part of the evolutionary process (essential for adapting to changing environments) - but various disciplines and camps provide other perspectives.

...The mainstream medical industries deny any impact except acute infection - pushing vaccines for prevention and meds for treatment - and claim everything's "fixed" once the acute infection is gone.

Others recognize that many (if not most or all) viruses remain latent - and frequently have ongoing effects.

...There's little doubt that viral infections underlie the current pandemic of chronic disease, including: cancer, stroke, arthritis, diabetes, obesity and etc. There's also little doubt that the main vectors of transmission are vaccines and the (now global) food supply.

This info (and the relevant research) is kept out of the mainstream to protect the medical, agricultural and food industries. TPTB have no real solutions; current policies are driven by fears of economic disruption and social anarchy.

...Much science does show the link between "infections" and evolution. One scientist you might be interested in checking out is Susan L. Lindquist (White. Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MA) - she recently received a National Medal of Science. One aspect of her research investigates prions' role(s) in evolution.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by VonDoomen
 



Originally posted by VonDoomen
reply to post by tauristercus
 


actually, were told theres 2 forms of evolution.
the slow and gradual process and occasionally it goes by leaps and bounds.

Another thing that you are not taking into consideration is that it is not just 1 organism that is evolving. Every organism on the planet has the chance to bring about a useful evolution.

In all honesty, i think you just dont fully understand evolution and thats why your having a hard time figuring this out.


Obviously tauristercus doesn't "fully understand evolution" - but then again, nobody does. Moreover, much of the evidence and science is contested and controversial.

imho - If only half the science were acknowledged, TPTB would be forced to dismantle the global economic system - starting with Big Pharma, the agricultural and food processing industries, and going on from there.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 09:23 AM
link   
Humans are to primates what orchids are to flowers...


Nothing more than greater than average adaptability



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
Humans are to primates what orchids are to flowers...


Nothing more than greater than average adaptability


Erm.

Orchids have an extremely specialized and limited ecological niche. Most primates also are fairly restricted in terms of niche. Conversely, humans have the ability to live, and thrive, almost anywhere. ...What are you really trying to say?



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Everything you do, everything you think and everything you eat takes its toll on you, if you are good at math and use your brain for calculations all the time, then chances are that your offspring will do the same, survival of the fittest And evolution is giving us larger brains for a reason, survival.

To leave the earth and garentee our survival, you might not be able to understand it but to me it's Childs play, you will look at our technological level and see the advancements yourself,100 years ago they said man cannot fly, yet thousands of planes are in the air today, they said man could not walk on the moon it was too far, yet we have an international space station, and are litterly exploring other worlds.

This has always been the destiny of our species, some will undertstand and go with the way of the future, while others are left in the dust struggling to comprehend it. This is the way of the future, no longer will homo sapiens rule the land, but homo novus.

If you are genetically inbred, or sevrelly mentally retarded, do us a favour and do not reproduce.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyInTheOintment

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by tauristercus
 


There are genomes much bigger than human genome present in much simpler and older organisms - the biggest genome has 670 billion base pairs, and is present in simple single celled Amoeba dubia. There is no relationship between genome lenght and position of organism in the tree of life.

The part that is actually used for coding in human genome makes up just a few % of its lenght. Most of genome is not transcribed


So the human is a much more efficient use of the genetic database? That doesn't alter the holes in evolutionary theory (as they apply to the Homo genus). The evolution from Homo Erectus to Homo Sapiens can be evidenced only across a timeframe of 250,000 years or so. That's far too short a time - and besides; within that 250,000 years there is no convincing evidence of a series of mutations. Only a quick 'jump' from one lineage to another. Smacks of intervention (or the 'switching on' of dormant genes/ hybridisation experiments conducted by an intelligence described by our earliest forbears as 'the gods').

We could do it now! As in, we could 'advance' a chimpanzee by 'magically' combining it with our own DNA. If we did it on a planetary scale, to create a race of slave labourers able to take the strain of manual work away from ourselves - would we be as 'gods' to the chimp-men? Then, if we decided to move off into the far reaches of the universe, would we 'cut them loose' and give them the basics of civilisation in return for their service? I'm guessing we could, though whether we would be benevolent enough to let them have their freedom I don't know, given the disgraceful lack of humanitarianism displayed by our global elites.







My question is if we could do it now why arent we? If the ancient alien theory is true whats to say that these global elite are even human themselves? I really dont want to get into that arguement.. its a bit too david ikeish for me, but still if we could create a race of slave labor why dont we?



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by tauristercus

Originally posted by myster0
First: There is no ONE GIANT LADDER of DNA, there are 22 short PAIRS (i.e. semi-redundent copies of genes), and a pair of "sex chromosomes".

Agreed ... but in this instance I tried to simplify the concept of genetics, genomes, chromosomes, base pairs, nucleotides, etc for those of our ATS members who are NOT clued up on biology and to make the underlying concept of my thread understandable.
YOU may understand genes, chromosomes, etc ... but others may not be so fortunate and so I took the liberty of joining each of those separate chromosome "mini ladders" into a single GIANT LADDER. Doing so does NOT affect the premise of my thread.


I can appreciate your trying to help people understand this, but changing things done by PhDs and people who have worked their lives trying to understand a VERY complex science into a single idea where you compare basic 1:1 math is completely misleading!
Your theory falls apart in many, many ways with a single twist, say looking at the genome of a dog. Far fewer pairs.... so uh... different rate?

Not trying to be rude, per se, but I think this OP is a mockery of science.



edit on 27-12-2010 by Thermo Klein because: changed quote delineation



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 10:18 AM
link   
If I remember correctly, FERNS have the most complex DNA out of all organisms. Like 1000 times more than humans.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


Very interesting and informative thread for people like me, who didn't do so well in high school biology class. I like your simplified version of the mutations processes involved with "evolution," but when you lay everything out on the table, there are far more questions than answers, and one can surmise that Darwin's theory was just too simplified to explain this very complex process.

One poster had mentioned the possibility that perhaps asteroids could be the biological incubators that could be needed to "seed" a planet with life. I can see where this could help explain how we went from the proverbial primordial soup to fully functional human beings in such a "short" time span. Perhaps many of the gene sequences were already written before life exploded on this planet. Our Earth is relatively young compared to the estimated age of the universe (14 billion years, give or take a few billion). Given the numbers you supplied and the theory that you have, could it be possible that our Earth was seeded with genetic material that was already a few billion years old? That could potentially make up the difference when looking at the apparent rate of mutations (both beneficial, and malignant) that is the supposed foundation of Darwin's evolutionary theory, and how it applies to life on our planet.

I am the supporter of many different theories on how life was first formed, because, quite frankly, we still know jack-squat about how we came to be on this planet. Anything from extra-terrestrials, to a universal consciousness, to Darwin's theory on evolution could all make sense to me, and, at least to an extent, can be explained through our current understanding of science. Of course, we are still left with the how's and why's pertaining to our existence on this planet.

I lean more toward the theory that humans, or perhaps life in general on Earth, was genetically engineered at some point in Earth's history. At the rate that life exploded on Earth, coupled with the accelerated nature of progress on Earth, this theory makes more sense to me than random genetic mutations (amoeba to human in a little over 3 billion years). I'm still left with the question of who did this and why, but I would guess that some day, our world's greatest minds will figure this one out...that is, if we don't all destroy ourselves first.

Thank you for the thought-provoking thread. It was very well-written and presented.


Peace be with you.

-truthseeker



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 

Don't forget that, for instance, the human body is an extremely large statistical community of individual, symbiotically interactive cells (almost 100 TRILLION cells) of different kinds (several hundred types) each with its nucleus containing a DNA target subject to a mutation event. This seems to be an ideal setup for rapid adaptation - as Darwin observed in the Galapagos. Life as we know it on this planet is a miracle of survivability-design, and our DNA uses only a small fraction of its encoded information capacity. Likewise, our brains use only 10% or so of grey matter.

Life on earth is extremely adaptable with 'built-in' reserves ... almost like life here settled in from drifting in the immensity of space for a long long time but with systems fully stocked, ready to go and up for a wide range of environments because it is programmed for adaptability through bio-feedback. Makes one wonder a bit, huh?



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


Ferns have more dna than humans.

I'm afraid, however interesting your argument is, it is a purely homocentric one without any consideration for other species, who have more and less dna than us. Ferns have over 100x the dna of us. I doubt that makes the earth 100X older.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by VonDoomen
reply to post by tauristercus
 


actually, were told theres 2 forms of evolution.
the slow and gradual process and occasionally it goes by leaps and bounds.

Another thing that you are not taking into consideration is that it is not just 1 organism that is evolving. Every organism on the planet has the chance to bring about a useful evolution.

In all honesty, i think you just dont fully understand evolution and thats why your having a hard time figuring this out.


Totally agree. A monstrous deficit of understanding has been shown by the OP. As you point out, 'punctuated equilibrium' is a form of evolution that occurs in leaps and bounds.

Not only that but does a single cell organism only have a single base pair?

This thread has depressed me. I personally believe that it is entirely possible that there has been tinkering of our DNA by outside forces. However, i dont want the OP arguing for it because he/she weakens the case with this stunning ignorance.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


AHA! and BINGO!

...I have had similar experiences and pretty much agree with your assessment. ...My hypothesis is that viral infections trigger latent infections in the blood vessel walls and thereby, TIA's or mini-strokes - the increased brain power results from the "healing / rebuilding process" creating new neuronal and other pathways.


[I could go on about it, but that's the nutshell.]


This is addressed to both of you. I find your theories/hypotheses fascinating. Rather than me blindly blundering around the interwebs trying to avoid crackpot sites, could either or both of you point me in the right direction for further research?

Thanks in advance.

edit on 27-12-2010 by spookfish because: Sorting out tag error



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by spookfish
 



Rather than me blindly blundering around the interwebs trying to avoid crackpot sites, could either or both of you point me in the right direction for further research?


Specify pubmed in your search (the NIH database). ...peer reviewed journals are the accepted standard, but many of the newer open access publications are astoundingly good.

If you're interested in the concept of complex organisms as superorganisms, the idea is still considered heretical by the mainstream - but Wired published a good primer article in 2004: People Are Human-Bacteria Hybrid. ...The concept likely won't go mainstream for a good while because it describes the need for 'personalized medicine,'



...professor Ian Wilson from Astra Zeneca, believes the "human super-organism" concept "could have a huge impact on how we develop drugs, as individuals can have very different responses to drug metabolism and toxicity."
"The microbes can influence things such as the pH levels in the gut and the immune response, all of which can have effects on the effectiveness of drugs," Wilson said.


Also search microbiome, and the Human Microbiome Project (HMP) run by the National Institutes of Health.

Viral latency leads to epigenetics.


Epigenetic Dysregulation of Epstein-Barr Virus Latency and Development of Autoimmune Disease

…An increased viral load or a changed presentation of a subset of lytic or latent EBV proteins that cross‑react with cellular antigens may trigger pathogenic processes through molecular mimicry that result in multiple sclerosis (MS), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA).


For insights into the mechanics of molecular mimicry, see Susan Lindquist's work.

Definitely review epigenetics, and non-genetic heritability. Some quick picks…


Host epigenetic modifications by oncogenic viruses

Host epigenetic changes owing to viruses and virus-associated cancers
Conclusions
The cause or consequence conundrum in cancer epigenetics is equally relevant to the epigenetics of viral infection. It is difficult to differentiate an epigenetic change that is directly due to viral infection, due to the host antiviral response or due to a subsequent downstream effect of the transformation process. Do these viruses happen to infect cancer progenitor cells that are already committed to cancer development and are, thus, just along for the ride? Or are cancer progenitor cells more susceptible to viral infection? Important cancer causing changes may be separated from their consequences via the identification of direct interactions between viral proteins and epigenetic regulators (Table 1).

***

Epigenetic modification induced by hepatitis B virus X protein…
The hepatitis B virus X protein (HBx) has been implicated as a potential trigger of the epigenetic deregulation of some genes, but the underlying mechanisms remain unknown. The aim of this study was to identify underlying mechanisms involved in HBx-mediated epigenetic modification.
**



[url=http://f1000.com/6208957]Virus-mediated efficient induction of epigenetic modifications of endogenous genes with phenotypic changes in plants.




Hope that helps.




top topics



 
31
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join