|
'De-evolution' (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| MrJiveBoJingles |
I don't think we can assume that selective pressures on intelligence couldn't act in that sort of time frame. Ashkenazi Jews, for example, have an average IQ about 7 - 12 points higher than the norm for Europe:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_intelligence
Some speculate that this was because Jews were pushed into certain occupations like money-lending and banking due to persecution, and these occupations required a high mathematical aptitude for success. Jews who couldn't succeed at such occupations may have been more likely to merge into the general culture and disavow their Jewishness.
All you need for relatively quick change are a small group and very specific, intense selective pressures. |
|
|
| Nrg2Nfinit |
IQ tests are bull. Perhaps its the way that they are brought up, i don't think its an actual selectoin pressure. The time frame is too short.
The brain is plastic. Everyone has different neural connections and pathways which are formed through experence and developed learning (not an evolutionary aspect) when we talk about humans with respect to other humans.
according to Y chromosomal DNA analysis, Ashkenazi jews came about around 10,000 years ago from Egyptian/ bahrain roots which first appeared 45,000 years ago. This tree also branched out to turkey and italy. Although this is speculative because the mTDNA doesn't show as much detail in their migration, you can surely expect some interbreeding to occur. This is true since you see some variation between mTDNA (maternal/mitochondrial) and Y chromosomal (paternal) DNA migration routes.
There are several points here.
random mating is occuring, you are not isolating genes.
those who are rich are not passing down any "rich genes" down to their kids. This is learned behaviour thus no genetic aspect selected for or against.
High IQ results can be attained by learned behaviour at critical learning stages in the child. (for instance chess at a young age)
child protigies usually have dumb ass parents. Though the link may be genetic, it certainly hasn't been isolated for and thus can be analogus to a random mutation like a sixth finger or something.
So again, there are no selective pressures, its simply learned behaviour (being smart with money is equivalent to doing your math homework at a young age and training yourself at that critical learning stage).
I take you back to The ancient egyptians, babylonians and greeks who lived thousands of years ago. I honestly believe that their intelligence was identical if not superior to ours. |
|
|
| Armitage |
| De-evolution does not really exist. |
|
|
| Domesticated |
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
true. Op said 1000 years.. That's nowhere near long enough for significant biological differentiation to occur |
I said 1000+ years, meaning anything over that.
| quote: | Originally posted by mysticalninja
That's not how evolution works. Evolution occurs when natural selection chooses a random mutation to live on. Evolution is completely random without natural selection to guide it. Social surroundings have nothing to do with it, nothing guides evolution except survival. Nothing besides genetic engineering can sway the mutations. they are random. |
Do you have proof that mutations are random? I disagree with that, I think changes in physiology are a direct biological response to the challenges a species faces in their direct environment. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit
IQ tests are bull. |
I don't think IQ tests tell the whole story about a person's mind, but I think they are useful in assessing how quick someone is at doing basic tasks like sorting things and recognizing patterns, which are involved in many applications of "intelligence." |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
Do you have proof that mutations are random? I disagree with that, I think changes in physiology are a direct biological response to the challenges a species faces in their direct environment. |
The environment just eliminates certain individuals, resulting in differential survival of different phenotypes and their corresponding genotypes. Mutations are simply errors in the copying of DNA. The environment doesn't directly cause these errors, except in a few cases like radiation, viral infection, or exposure to certain chemicals. |
|
|
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
I said 1000+ years, meaning anything over that. |
True.. but then why not 100+ or 1+ to be safe. The true figure is in the hundreds of thousands or even millions. Several orders of magnitude higher than your lower limit to the point that it is safe to assume you had a much lower estimation in mind.
| quote: | | Do you have proof that mutations are random? I disagree with that, I think changes in physiology are a direct biological response to the challenges a species faces in their direct environment. |
The theory of evolution by natural selection is the most elegant attempt thus far to explain what has been observed. We see random mutations occurring across the animal (and plant) kingdom quite regularly.. for the most part to the detriment of the individual involved. Natural selection specifically refers to the process by which those mutations which prove beneficial are naturally kept in the gene pool because those individuals are more likely to survive and breed with more partners.
Certain environmental pressures can increase the rate of mutation - say for example exposure to certain chemicals or radiation. But they have not been observed to affect the direction of mutation - for example while many of the people living in the vicinity of the "Polygon" where the USSR tested nuclear devices suffered genetic mutations; none of them developed a freakish genetic immunity to harmful radiation through a new mutation.
The Lederberg experiment confirmed that immunity to penicilin in bacteria occurred through natural selection of randomly mutated strains rather than as a direct response to exposure to the penicillin. |
|
|
| Nrg2Nfinit |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
Do you have proof that mutations are random? |
its about as true as the theory of gravity. When we say random however im sure that it isnt actually random
Sometimes when molecules pair up and are binding to a site they may structure and position themselves to be able to fit in a site where they are not suppose to go. For instance in DNA replication you have nucleotides which bind together to form a double helix. This double helix is basically an instruction manual to form protiens and compounds which your body uses. When these compounds are needed, chemical reactions take place to signal segments of the DNA to translate its code to form the compounds. So sometimes the wrong nucleotides are substituted in or even not placed at all and you get an error in the DNA. IT is not random per say, as there are chemical gradients bond energy and positioning involved, but in turn there is no direct explanation for these misshaps so we say that it is random. These "random" mutations can code for incorrect compounds and in turn cause the organism to develop specific traits or physiological differences. A good example would be to look at hox genes. A single mutation can cause a fly to have 4 wings instead of 2. Thats the power of mutations. So you think if this is plausable then you can see how random mutations can cause an organism to change drastically over time.
I think thats the jist of it. |
|
|
| Nrg2Nfinit |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
I don't think IQ tests tell the whole story about a person's mind, but I think they are useful in assessing how quick someone is at doing basic tasks like sorting things and recognizing patterns, which are involved in many applications of "intelligence." |
doing basic tasks for our species is an acquired (learned) trait. The critical learning age plays a huge roll in this. Look at all child protegy's again. how come we hear nothing of their parents? its not a heritable trait that is passed down, or at least it is not present in every generation.
I am a firm believer that you can take anyone of any ethnicity and train them to be just as intelligent. We have a black president running the united states, Amazing russian chess players that can calculate the permuations of moves for a game, Egyptians that built the pyramids and ran the longest running civilization thus far, Famous painters and sculpters from italy, Jewish economists and bankers. The list goes on. The point is intelligence for our species is an evolved trait thats for sure, but if your going to segregate it to race or groups of people, i would have to disagree. There are not valid selection pressures that are going to segregate for intelligence. |
|
|
| Sunsnail |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit
Jewish economists and bankers. |
:stongue: |
|
|
| Nrg2Nfinit |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sunsnail
:stongue: |
what?
did you want me to say lawyers? |
|
|
|
|
