| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Short Attention Span Theater- |
| Men being men is a bad deal Guys should evolve beyond masculinity |
| 2006-10-23 |
| Posted by:BrerRabbit |
| #29 Oh yeah, the junk is where the good stuff is these days. It is also haphazzard in many places. Non-expressed genes are there, transposons, etc. Protien folding is big as well, as that is where the biochemistry actually takes place - and is not directly attributable to just the DNA code. The multiple layer is probably to do with RNA and the new understanding that is coming with regard to having way more complex relationship with DNA and protien than just DNA -> RNA -> Protien. |
| Posted by: bombay 2006-10-23 23:45 |
| #28 Bombay, they may, but then their figure is just a flight of fancy. The last word of genetic research is that likely the junk DNA is not haphazzard heaps of junk stutter at all, but that they have some purpose that we did not decipher yet. Would have to remember where to find a paper that, based on a thorough statistical analysis, proposed that there are several layers of encoding apparent in DNA. Sort of like a encryption algorithm, where some sequences function as keys to decode another layer. |
| Posted by: twobyfour 2006-10-23 23:34 |
| #27 Lol, Joe. Sheesh. |
| Posted by: .com 2006-10-23 23:31 |
| #26 T'is the news day for it > even FOX > MICKEY D's getting a makeover, even Ronald. More fit + athletic > DA RONUUULD = ONLY GIRLEY MEN EAT AT WENDY'S + BURGER KING. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-10-23 23:30 |
| #25 twobyfour, they may be tossing out differences in the junk regions of the DNA, looking at the typical marker genes used for the study. |
| Posted by: bombay 2006-10-23 23:09 |
| #24 There is this figure out there that chimps' DNA is ~ 98% corresponding to human DNA. Meanwhile, the divergence in human species DNA alone comprises about 9%. Something does not add up here. Yes, it is comparing apples and oranges. The diff is in methodology. In essence, you break both test DNA chains (humans & chimps) into very short segments. Shake out the vitro vigorously and wait what recombines. somewhere between 92% and 98% would, according to people involved. But lie the chains beside each other, and Houston, we have a problem. |
| Posted by: twobyfour 2006-10-23 22:57 |
| #23 Which means, it does tend to evolve faster than X, but doesn't indicate if more evolved than X per se. |
| Posted by: bombay 2006-10-23 22:53 |
| #22 One thing to recall when considering X and Y. There are always more copies of X than Y. Y therefore tends to show more change than X. |
| Posted by: bombay 2006-10-23 22:50 |
| #21 tw-:) Thanks for the kind words. I probably should have read the article more carefully. |
| Posted by: Jules 2006-10-23 21:45 |
| #20 then take me to task over my reading of some great work, say a Stainless Steel Rat episode My, how English departments have changed since the olden days! ;-) One of my long-time favourites, too, .com. Jules, you'd best be careful. With your brain, wwardrobe, and a gun licence, the single male Rantburgers will be lined up around the block. I would argue about the Y chromosome=evolved article: I interpreted it to mean that female chimps were already pretty civilized, it was the behaviour of their males that held back the species, rather than that changes in human male behaviour is what's moved us forward. eLarson, you really, really don't want to take away estrogen replacement theory. Really. If you're concerned, drink beer or vodka instead of water. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-10-23 19:40 |
| #19 Jules - Glad to hear it. Armed and dangerous and smart is the triumvirate of our survival. :-) |
| Posted by: .com 2006-10-23 18:43 |
| #18 *snort* Lol, Frank! Wotta payoff, eh? |
| Posted by: .com 2006-10-23 18:42 |
| #17 Ima willing to learn more if it means I can have multiple orgasms :-) |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-10-23 18:33 |
| #16 False alarm Xbalanke. Sorry to cause any anxiety. Btw... Is that your car? |
| Posted by: Jacquelene Ripper 2006-10-23 17:52 |
| #15 Too much estrogen in the water supply. Oh no! They're poisoning our vital bodily fluids again. Gen. Ripper was right. |
| Posted by: xbalanke 2006-10-23 17:46 |
| #14 .com-Just learning about firearm safety and use from a best friend's hubby. After that, license and purchase; who knows what the world will be in five, ten years. I wanna be as ready as I can be. Xena? Well, only in terms of wardrobe. :) AlanC-Yeah, I saw that article, but something rang false in it. I was going to comment that day, but let it go, figuring few would actually buy it. Rely on the evidence around you. Can you, with a straight face, argue that men behave in a more "evolved" fashion than women? What factors define "evolved"? |
| Posted by: Jules 2006-10-23 17:45 |
| #13 Metrosexuality: Where no man will ever go |
| Posted by: badanov 2006-10-23 17:11 |
| #12 "It's true that only women can bear children and breast-feed." How morphologically-correct of hym. |
| Posted by: Flea 2006-10-23 17:09 |
| #11 Lol, a5089. Truth. |
| Posted by: .com 2006-10-23 17:00 |
| #10 The world already became much more feminine the day Charles Bronson died. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-10-23 16:56 |
| #9 Well, the world is becoming more feminine. No doubt about that. I blame it on Hormone Replacement Therapy. Too much estrogen in the water supply. (/sarc) |
| Posted by: eLarson 2006-10-23 16:42 |
| #8 Heh. So something recently (I'm old enough to have some short term memory issues) about a comparison between Chimp & Human DNA. Seems like almost all of the differences are accounted for on the Y chromosome. Yep, it's guys that evolved beyond the apes. The article went on to point out that on the gross behavioral, social level there are not to many differences in the Female role between the two species; but, in the Male realm there are significant differences, starting with monogomy. (Insert sarcastic comment about Muslim devolution here) |
| Posted by: AlanC 2006-10-23 16:11 |
| #7 Hey, and then the wimmin folk kin evolve beyong femininity!... Whatever THAT means. |
| Posted by: mojo 2006-10-23 16:01 |
| #6 Would it improve my sex life? |
| Posted by: DoDo 2006-10-23 15:48 |
| #5 Well said, Jules - and thanks from the myn's hovel. One thing I'd like to note: No one ever gets all twinky-eyed about the aggressiveness of Amazons. I mean, sheesh, no one ever picks on Xena. Secret fantasy? Double standard? Lol. I likes wymyns who can shoot the eye out a crazed Jimmah-killing jackrabbit at 20 yards while in full rabbit-paddle, then take me to task over my reading of some great work, say a Stainless Steel Rat episode. We can even share taking out the trash 'n stuff, heh. |
| Posted by: .com 2006-10-23 15:45 |
| #4 "The worst insult one man can hurl at another -- whether it's boys on the playground or CEOs in the boardroom -- is the accusation that a man is like a woman." I agree-hearing the accusation "p*ssy" thrown at men as a sign of disdain when I've got one of those is getting really old. You can't say you like it and disdain it at the same time. As to the argument of this article: without the male traits so often ridiculed-that they will fight and compete to survive-our species would not survive. I appreciate the men in my life who have shown me that competition is a good thing. |
| Posted by: Jules 2006-10-23 15:30 |
| #3 Ah, yes. Bob Jensen, UT's Pet Lefty. Most of the women on campus could probably kick his ass... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2006-10-23 15:29 |
| #2 Well, the world is becoming more feminine. No doubt about that. |
| Posted by: Iblis 2006-10-23 15:09 |
| #1 Two completely unsurprising aspects of this article: It was written by a professor of journalism and published in The San Francisco Chronicle -- so consider the sources. (And as my dad used to say, when you try to make boys into girls and vice versa you're only going to regret it later.) |
| Posted by: Jonathan 2006-10-23 15:04 |