howcomes humans are the only species with this amount of random genetics and mutations, types? howcomes if you look at 5000, fish/dear/elephants/horses/lions/bears etc from the same region, look at them and all the adult males will roughly be the same size and look near exact in appearance, but then gather 5000 humans from the same region and asses them, there will be mass differences even if they are all of the same native origin and culture, they will all look different and there will be extream differences that you wouldent see in the wild, why is this? peace
Humans travel more widely because of our technology and give the gene pool a thorough stirring. Go back to the time before horses were domesticated as draft animals in any region, and you'll find that almost all of the people in any one community look as similar as your fish.
yeah good points but i dont agree fully, i still think we are to diverse to be just a single species, look at 1 million adult salmon then look at 1 million adult humans, see the difference? peace
Look into entomology... Namely, Kinsey and his ants. Members of the same species do vary. It's just not always noticeable to lay people. As for size, non-human animals compete for survival, and the runts will either be killed or will be too weak to reproduce. Of course, civilized societies of humans do not engage in such [killing] practices.
Interesting question, and I'm really not sure. I do know that the amount of DNA in an organism does not correlate to its complexity, but I also agree that its no coincidence that fish/bears/frogs etc. all look almost identical. Perhaps humans simply have a larger percentage of total DNA that corresponds to phenotypical proteins???
This is all wrong. We are a young species and as a result have little diversity compared to other animals. http://science.education.nih.gov/supplements/nih1/genetic/guide/genetic_variation1.htm In comparison to humans, look at the amazing diversity in dogs, <I>canis familiaris</I>, which range in size from Chihauhuas to mastiffs. Take another look at bears. They do not look alike. The European brown bear, the North American grizzly, and the humongous Kodiak bear are all from the same species, <I>Ursos arctos</I>.
I am not well versed in this area, so I will agree about bears, but the great variaty of dogs is surely man made and relatively recent (AD only I bet except for a few in ancient china etc.) I suspect that the diversity of the human gene pool is going down as more differnt groups mingle in this modern age. Perhaps it all depends upon how diversity is defined. If by the number of different combinations that exist, then yes the diversity is way up with the population increased, but some how that does not fit my idea of diversity. I tend to think of it more as how much any randomly chosen individual is likely to differ from the average, and that I bet is going down. What is the definition?
i dont agree your speaking of different breeds of dogs, ok if you compare a tribe of 50 men all the same (breed) you get variations like fat slim tall short, hairy hairless, and all kinds of variation, if you look at 50 bulldogs, or 50 other dogs of same gender and breed they all look the same basicaly. peace
No, you are definitely all wrong. Look how close chimpanzees are to humans, and Neanderthals were to present day humans. Chimps and homo sapiens are genetically very close. And then all those other primates. Then if you consider fish, their "genetic and mutation" diversity surpasses us by far! There are lampreys, teleosts (20,000 species), sharks, cartilaginous fish, bony fish; and lung fish and coelelacanths that are argued to be direct descendants of tetrapods and then humans.
valich, You are talking about all fish and comparing it to humans, a single species of primate. Compare fish to mammals, and it is a fair comparison.
Of course not! I am simply replying to the initial post; "if you look at 5000, fish/dear/elephants/horses/lions/bears etc from the same region, look at them and all the adult males will roughly be the same size and look." I'm just assuming he means 5000 different fish species, but in any case, I'm still setting the record straight and putting the thread on a more direct knowledgeable course, don't you think?
I wish I could answer that. Scientists tell us that "race" is a misconception and we are all simply the same species, right? D H said: So, tell me... If Ursos arctos is the species, then what is the North American Grizzly? Is that a sub-species? What defines "species"? I thought a species was defined by mating and reproducing. If a Grizzly and a Kodiak can have a kid, that means they are one species, correct? If that is true, why do we define the difference (scientifically, not socially) between the Grizzly and the Kodiak, but not the African Human and the Asian Human? What EmptyForceOfChi seemed to be saying to me was: Look at this Grizzly and THAT Grizzly... Yes, there are obviously differences in maxo-facial structure and other subtle differences (such as markings). And Yes, another Grizzly can tell Bill Bear from Bob Bear. Now, look at Kareem Abdul Jabarr and Bruce Lee. The differences are much more merked and obvious, and not simply because we are human. Now all these people are telling him that he is wrong, and he very well may be, but none have really told him clearly why. People brought up dogs and the vast difference between the Chihuahua and the Mastiff, for example. However, look from one Mastiff to the next, and again, you will not see the wide difference between Jabarr and Lee. So, explin, in clear and certain terms, why that is. Dogs can cross-breed, so they are one species, just like humans, right? So why are there different breeds of dogs, yet scientists continually tell us that there are no "human breeds".
Yes we do know. They died out because they chose to stop reproducing among themselves. They were very different from our human race. They were very wise and loveful people, they knew everything. They didn't have much technology, they didn't need it. They lived in harmony with nature and themselves, and they knew that there was only one self. Life on earth is under constant change, at some point, the change becomes apparent. So, when there were only a few ancients left, there lived another, very primitive human race. The ancients led the primitive people to higher truths, away from ignorance and suffering. They were kings. That's why the king is always chosen from the same family, since they had "royal" blood in their veins, but of course, it is not true anymore. Things have balanced out. Because people are egoistic, they have created several "religions" of their teachings.. Before they left the earth to go to the unconscious, they needed to give their legacy, their wisdom and blood to the primitive humans (so that we could also become free, after a long long time), so the males of the ancient race had children with the females of the primitive race. That way, our human race was born. In the beginning, these 'hybrids' were all very different from each other. Some were very wise, while others were dumb and evil. Then there were also those who inherited both the "magical knowledge" and the egoistic mind from the primitive human side. They caused much evil to others and themselves. But there were also good "witches". This is a broad subject.
c7ityi_, Would it be foolish of me to ask for some references regarding this, or inquire to how you came to this knowledge?
Anyhoo... Chimp's faces all look rather distinct. And there are regional differences between chimps. And split offs such as bonobos which do not only look different in posture and face but also show different behaviour.
