Prove Evolution Through Genetics

Attached: Evolutionary Racism for Kids!.jpg (1528x3336, 1.82M)

Offset by constant mutation, but yes, natural selection - any form of selection - tends to 'target' certain phenotypes, depending on the conditions of the selection (whether environmental factors or conscious human effort).
Think of mutation as a source of genetic diversification due to error and variation, and selection is the contextual 'pruning' of that 'growth' to whatever the conditions of the selection dictate.

… Of course, one has to keep in mind that, due to the innate interconnectedness of some genetic sequences, selection for one factor can inadvertently act as selection for another, or several others, in unison.

And I JUST want proof of the existence of a divine being, but some things are presently beyond human capacity, and the manner in which you ask that - "i JUST want" - seems to suggest a flippancy akin to base shitposting with regards to the complexity and innate difficulties of production of what you're requesting.

Of course, that's probably your point, as it were, yes?

so we are genetically engineered Gods ourself?

Suppose a plague hit the world to which 97% of people have no immunity. By random chance, the the remaining 3% just happened to have an inborn resistance to the disease due to their own specific gene that makes them immune. These people reproduce, their children who carry the gene survive, their children who don't perish. Over time, virtually all of the future descendants of this population will carry the gene. That is evolution. Imagine that it's instead of being able to survive a plague, instead the world got flooded and you needed to survive better in aquatic environments. Genes granting an advantage in that aquatic environment would be selected for over the vast expanse of time because you'll naturally have some people that are better swimmers than others who can hold their breath longer and so on. Keep selecting for it over thousands of generations and guess what's gonna happen? It's the same principle that allowed us to breed yappy little teacup sized mutts from wolf ancestors, except nature does the selection instead of man. Nature does the selection by the posing threats to survival via changing environmental conditions.

Genetic distances (Ds) derived from nuclear microsatellite DNA allele frequencies resulted in inconclusive resolution of the interspecies relationship of brown bears, polar bears, and black bears (Ursus americanus, Paetkau et al. 1997). Distances were larger between polar bears and brown bears than between black bears and polar/brown bears, which is inconsistent with the conventional recognition of brown bears and polar bears as sister species and black bears more distantly related. This is believed to be due to microsatellite mutation dynamics that result in the loss of linearity of genetic distance and time (Paetkau et al. 1997).

Relying on the fossil record and DNA analysis, scientists have been able to arrive at a clearer picture of the polar bear’s evolutionary path over the millennia…Approximately 125,000 years ago a population of brown bears in the far north of their range was likely split off from their brown bear ancestors, perhaps because of competition for food. The population likely became isolated by massive glaciers and, while most died in the harsh environment, those bears with an evolutionary advantage — ideal coat color and thickness for extreme cold — survived and bred. Over thousands of years, this population of bears underwent further evolutionary change, adapting even more specialized traits for surviving the harsh polar environment. When life in the North demanded teeth better shaped for ripping apart seals than munching berries, the polar bear’s molar teeth changed significantly from those of the brown bear. The bears also grew white fur, which camouflaged them in their snow-covered surroundings and gave them a hunting advantage. Scientists believe that at first these bears scavenged seal carcasses that had washed ashore, and gradually began to hunt the seals by waiting at the water’s edge as the seals surfaced to breathe. This is believed to be an important step in the evolution of a new subspecies of bear — Ursus maritimus or the polar bear.

Kind of
We are a lot older than several thousands years. Yep. Try several tens of millions of years old
We were seeded here by our Aryan Sky brothers

Related: Basically all of these snakes would die in their natural habitat.
Captive breeders value their appearance however, so they are prized.

Selection is variable, and what is valuable in one context may be death in another.

We're their genetically engineered miner slaves.

How did the changes in teeth and hair color happen in the bear population? Did the genes for better shaped teeth for ripping apart seals already exist in the population? If so, then how is that evolution? It is simply natural selection, and the bears with the inferior teeth died off, leading to a decrease in genetic diversity.

When do I get my anime dinosaur girl?

Define 'better'.
But yes, the genetic potential for variation in tooth size, amongst other traits, was almost-certainly present in those populations.

A gets you to B
B gets you to C
C gets you to D
You're looking at the A to D connection and wondering as to the stages in between.

Imagine you're walking down a hallway and and hall splits at certain points. Let's say there are two splits between you and a given door. To reach that door, you must take two lefts. If you do not take two lefts, you will be unable to access that door.
Processes of genetic variation in the reproductive process generate new possibilities based upon the genetic foundation in play.

Look at the domestic foxes.
Did the population have the genetic potential for the degree of aggression/docility espoused in the produce several generations following selection?
No, they did not - they had the genetic potential for precursor states to that which was reached by the post-selection latter generations.

Again, variation typically comes from error, and when you're dealing with huge quantities of protein and other micromolecules being transcribed and reproduced, errors can occur, and previous errors can and do alter the context of later errors, in terms of outcome.

A gets you to B, but not C or D
B gets you to C, but not D
C gets you to D
To get from A to D, you have to go through B and C.

I hate to admit it, but I watched a video about the Sumerians who actually wrote what would later be plagiarized as the book of Genesis and it was some wild stuff. I am kinda curious about why humans appear to have weird structures built into their chromosomes, as well as DNA that can't be sourced to anything else on the planet.

the real question is can angela merkel engineer somalians into germans

because the story of the Annunakis is true. The Sumerians were using base 60 numerical arithmetic compared to our base 10, during 1822 BC and 1762 BC. The Annunakis were white.

The cold hard fact is we can really do neither to a full extent, as we do not have all of the information.
Yes, and these go a long way proving portions of it being true, but as we can see with humans alone there is plenty of information (((released))) that threatens to, or directly, casts doubt on yesterday's theory.
Plus there are obvious classification errors made due to (((societal))) pressure alone.
The reason I bring up humans specifically, instead of Mongolian Shit Ants or something, is because we should, by ever means, have that down the most as we have extreme vested interest in humans, being them and all.
It is obvious that evolution exists in some way, especially micro evolution, but the origins of different species (and races, because we want to use a feel good word for humans) are not concrete and are under pressure for (((specific))) results instead of any results.
We may one day find out a true picture, at it will probably lie somewhere in the middle or completely off the field of play, because that is where things usually rest.
Of course that would require us wrestling control of scientific research, funding and publishing well away from (((anyone))) with political interests or (((gain))) other than the unfiltered and pure gain of knowledge itself.
Unkike and uncuck science and come back to it after we get real freedom to look without bias.

But how do you get to A?

beneficial mutations in humans? sickle cell, absence of wisdom teeth.

OP is a faggot. Clearly God did it. The bible god, not the elephant one. Fuck you if you don't believe me!

True story; language is divergent. Hey OP. Did you know language and culture is divergent? Funny how that works. If people go off and live in a isolated place for a long time their language changes and they start speaking new languages. Of course, how could this be? Clearly god just made all the languages and gave them to people. Or I guess god confused their tongues? This is the only explanation that makes sense. Did you know that if you look at people from isolated towns you can even see similarities of facial features from breeding within a smaller pool of people? Like if enough time were to elapse eventually a new people with a new culture, language, and religion would just emerge from a given area. It's really neat stuff, but probably not as neat as sucking on cocks. Good luck with that OP.

Yahowey only saw us as the slaves of the Judenschwien. But we broke free - became strong, created civilization free from the tyrannical order of God. He tried to split our tongues, but we have even overcome that. This is the new Babel, that even now Yahowey's agents seek to destroy through mammon, subversion and sabotage - even murder.

With every attack Yahowey throws against mankind, humans only grow stronger. Soon, we shall breach heaven and bring war to Yahowey for yoking us into slavery.

What if evolution isn't random at all. What if the world changes and your species needs to adapt to survive and the organism mutates itself in specific ways. it wouldn't happen in one generation, but over a number of generations, when the organisms all need to adapt, they slowly change. I don't think it takes millions of years. I think it takes tens to hundreds of years. A few generations. I feel like all organisms are always adapting in subtle ways based on need. Eventually those small adaptations result in broad changes in the organism.

Nobody knows that, we only have theories, and they are derivative from an innately limited perspective.

However, if you choose any arbitrary point before the very start of life, and label it A, works fine conceptually.

Not in her lifetime, no.

It is entirely withing the realm of possibility that the Warhammer 40k novels are not far off and this world isn't even the real Terra.

… Okay, but, that's not really how it works as far as the data goes.
The data suggests the changes are random, and the selection process applies the context.

Attached: California Enters the Warp.png (717x2414, 2.62M)

We have 6000 years of recorded history. Some structures are quite a bit older than that. The construction of Göbekli Tepe was around 9500-9000 BC. Archeological evidence of human fossils shows that we have been around in a somewhat modern form for around 200,000 years.

It's possible that at some point during the last 200k years, some advanced aliens might have manipulated our genome, but it's very hard to prove. We already have genetic engineering technology like CRISPR, so we know that it is in fact possible. What seems unlikely is that aliens would travel to us across the vast distances of space. I think this would require some sort of warp gate technology, where you travel through a wormhole to skip the intervening space. We don't have that tech yet, but it seems possible, given enough time and effort. If we can do it someday, then it seems logical that other intelligent species in our galaxy might have visited our little world.

We tend to think of our bodies as having a distinct separation between the functions that we consciously control and those that are automatic. You don't have to think about your heart beating for it to beat, for example. Other things are a mix like breathing. It will happen automatically, but you can choose to control your breathing. What if our genetics are similar. We think that we have no control over our own genetics but I think that when an organism is faced with environmental change, it wants to be more capable, more adaptable, to survive the new environment. Mind over matter. I think the desire to adapt plays a role.

Hoyle Improved on Darwin
Darwin's theory of point mutations and natural selection is OK, but it should perhaps be augmented with the late Fred Hoyle's theory that evolution on Earth is influenced by a steady influx of viruses arriving via comets.

How it Works -→ Genome Knock-ins Drive Evolution
Some viruses have the ability to place their own genes into the genome of an animal they infect. Clouds of zillions of identical virus particles probably descend from space during comet fly-by's. Thus infected, entire populations - a herd of buffalo, for instance - evolve much more effectively than if one buffalo has a point mutation and evolution then depends on natural selection of the offspring of that single animal (while the trait is diluted every generation).

Hoyle is right. The whole cosmos is saturated with life. And whether from space or not, viruses drive evolution by editing genomes;

Attached: Darwin thug crop.jpg (300x400 53.62 KB, 25.35K)

and in a normal system, they would have died off, not reproducing and contributing to the genepool.
lactase: can drink milk in adulthood, sickle cell disease (less chance for malaria), etc. don't wait to get introduced to it, you retard: do your own research, it's not fucking hard to do.

Interesting hypothesis. I've always felt that we don't lend enough credit to the extent to which viruses shape life.

yeah but space is a terribly hostile environment. I just did some light research on what temperatures a virus can survive.Being frozen and thawed kills 90% of viri unless they are protected by their surroundings. The study I read was checking virus survival in frozen lakes, deposited in bird feces. The virus material in the birdshit survived better, than virus material in the lake water itself. In space the material would be superheated on the sun facing side and frozen on the opposite side. I guess it's possible hoyle was right, but it seems unlikely. Over a long enough time scale, even the unlikely becomes probable. His theory seems to involve large quantities of material falling from space all the time.

My question is what is the source? Wheres all this supposed life coming from? Aren't the asteroids just debris thats been floating in our solar system since the early days when planetary colisions caused large debris fields. If so wouldn't most of the virus material be eliminated by the heat of planetary scale impacts and the subsequent freezing in space?

he is blatantly talking out of his ass. general consensus is that viruses originated as 'rogue RNA', originating at the same time life originated, when it still was RNA-based opposed to DNA based. when i have the time i'll post the articles on it if you want?

Oh shoot I read that book as a kid, it was pretty good

Yeah, and what if its radio waves from ze Germans?
There's no evidence to support what you're talking about, is all I'm saying, and if it were transpiring, I would expect we'd see evidence of it.

Yeah, its surprisingly red-pilled on a number of topics, from what I recall.

If the sky become thick and all of the niggers will become weak and die. The niggers with light skin will replace them and become new species but that will take years to evolve into different species though. Some mutations are good like immunity to the HIV and some mutations are bad like down syndrome.

Genetics is what powers mutation and natural selection. It is only counter-intuitive because you drank the kool aid about retards and subhumans being equal to you. As soon as you realize equality is a jewish lie to destroy the white race then you will realize that jews are trying to overturn the natural order and end history. They want a compliant subhuman race of slaves. All mutations and genetic garbage will be praised as "unique and equal" while our natural selection and darwinism is forgotten because "who gives a shit about biology fuckin nerd mane lolol"-tier Lysenkoism.

Remember, Biology is the ultimate redpill science. Next time lurk more before posting.

Most evolution is simply shifts in genetic frequencies among a population, not the introduction of new genes.

This is the case 99% of the time. Even when it doesn't the mutation is not necessarily helpful and is very likely harmful to the creatures ability to survive and reproduce.

However, it can be beneficial. One of te ways we breed new strains to bacteria to operate in our bioreactors in industry is forced mutation by radiation or mutagenic chemicals. You can then test all the strains for strain improvement. Its much more time consuming than genetic editing or selective pressure by altering environment/feedstock however.

please do

That's the thing; species don't generally have "beneficial genes". I mean, the most incapable, weak, and unintelligent humans can breed; the very fact that they can survive and have kids means that a "beneficial mutation" doesn't need to happen. Most genetic diversity is in the junk genes; it's all just a modification/addition/subtraction of what's already there; and you won't see a beneficial gene overnight.

That's just not true.
Get this; Lagomorphs (rabbits), rodents (rats), Primates (us), are all part of the same family branch; Ruminants (cows) and Carnivora (cats) are part of the same branch; however, we're more genetically related to cats than we are to rats, even though they're on a completely different branch. The reason we're more genetically similar, is because rats have sex a lot, and there's more generations of rats ever since their line diverged from Boreotheria (classic mammals); it's akin to being more genetically related to your cousin than your brother's great grand son.
Genetic diversity occurs with more generations, REGARDLESS if they're interbred; this is because the diversity is relative to every other specie/subspecies.

Evolution has been disproven by math about ten different ways since at least the 1970s. The only idiots who cling to this jewish nonsense are normie drones who can only think in a group and edgelord degenerates who use the "hurr durr we're all animals" excuse to be homosexual, furry, pedophiles, weeaboos, etc.

You got a link to that? Don't get me wrong, evolution is in itself an incomplete concept to explain the origins of the human intellect and atheists and jews built it up to be some sort of cosmology, but mutation, recombination and selection are pretty solid concepts, I would really like to know how someone would disprove this with mathematics

God + bible = you science nerds are wrong LOL

Brainlet GTFO.

Shoo shoo shoo misdirecting gaslighting Lysenkoist jew

That's an interesting idea. I'm going to check out this book. I've sometimes wondered if there could be beneficial viruses….

There's your problem
They certainly are, however, you forgot to include "time" and "probability." It has been shown mathematically that even the millions of years jewish skyuntists give themselves isn't enough time to go from single-cell organism to human. Statistically, the odds of even the most basic form of life developing within ever square foot of the earth's surface within 10 billion years is less than one chance out of a billion trillion.
That is why you will never see a plain mathematical formula for evolution printed in a jewish skyunce book; all the math proves them wrong.

Let me teach you some basic logic user:

Anon1: Is DNA a complex matematical code?
Anon2: Yes
Anon1: And have you ever seen any complex codes spontaneously develop besides DNA?
Anon2: No
Anon1: Have you ever seen intelligent creatures write codes?
Anon2: Yes.
Anon1: Therefore, which is more likely; DNA wrote itself, or an intelligence wrote it?
Anon2: I like to fuck men in the butt, and some hooknose gentlemen who control everything assure me there is no God for goys, so I'm going to chose "evolution"
Anon1: Of course you are.

Attached: matrix_steak.jpg (620x412, 300.8K)

I don't think evolution by random mutation is a solid concept. However, recombination and selection are, but these two lead to microevolution not macroevolution.

I already know equality is a lie to destroy the white race. And we need to smash cultural marixism. Now, back to the topic at hand….

James Watson the man who won a Nobel prize for his work in genetics was blacklisted for suggesting their was a difference in cognitive ability between Africans and Europeans. What you have is opinion not fact.

Shortly after birth, a mother would bathe her child in wine to see whether the child was strong. If the child survived it was brought before the Gerousia by the child's father. The Gerousia then decided whether it was to be reared or not. If they considered it "puny and deformed", the baby was thrown into a chasm on Mount Taygetos known euphemistically as the Apothetae (Gr., ἀποθέτας, "Deposits").
This was, in effect, a primitive form of eugenics.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (610x753, 544.74K)

You can't prove our existence with mathematics. By the laws of propability, we shouldn't exist, yet alone "evolve".

lloyd pye went to college on a football scholarship, has a degree in psychology, and worked in army intelligence

trust him at your own peril

It should be mentioned that using radiation-induced mutagenesis bypasses all laws surround GMOs, though the end result is practically the same.

Most mutations are, it is the rare mutation that drives evolution. Webbed feet being an example of a beneficial mutation since they help us swim better.

In the thirty years I've been asking, I've literally never once met a creationist who even knows what evolution is. You're a disgrace to the white race you're pretending to be a part of, nigger.

Attached: Also_Search_For.png (552x644, 195.76K)

Do the same calculations, but this time include every earth-like planet in the universe. This is why we can't find anything with SETI, life is so extraordinarily rare, that we may be alone in this galaxy. Life may have once existed elsewhere but was wiped out by a catastrophe. This is why we need to colonize space and preserve the genetic code of every living creature except Jews.

Do we look like wikipedia to you?

Do your own fucking homework.

If we are genetically engineered to be miners, then why do we suck at it? Shouldn't we have huge arms, claws, and eyes; and be able to breath in low oxygen conditions like mole rats?

Don't reply to me or my post ever again you faggot.

Are you THAT fucking retarded?

It does not even need a 3 digits IQ to grasp that, fucktard. It's common sense if you devote a few minutes of thought to it.

not all mutations are detrimental enough to be naturally selected against.

Not particularly skeptical towards the ancient Ayyryans hypothesis but citation really fucking needed. Personally haven't encountered a single quasi-credible genetic claim that human genome is atypical for great apes other than the obvious chromosome fusion that separated our lineage from chimps' and bonobos'.

You forgot something.

Attached: sage phylogeny.jpg (436x336, 33.51K)

No, it's a random series of four types of nucleotides selected by function and practical application. Did you even go to school or did your parents make budget cuts from your home schooling?

This is the same shit in different timescales, you mouthbreather. We've bred these abominations from wolves within less than 30k years, chinks bred the Pekingese dog in even less.

The only tangible difference between choanoflaggelate unicellular organisms and sponges are the mineralized non-cellular skeleton sponges' choanocytes secret just to anchor themselves on.

Human mind can't even intuitively depict in their mind the actual extent of a 800 million years' timespan.

Attached: boston terrier.png (600x583, 273.42K)

Genetic mutation is guided by some yet undiscovered link between the mind and genes. We know neurons can pass genetic material. Can they also direct cells to experiment with segments of their DNA? More stress more experimentation. Failed cells get culled. Sometimes this results in cancer but usually is erased on micro level before it gets out of hand. Successful cells transmit data to neurons which then signall all cells to copy the mutation. A process like this would explain the link between mind and cancer. It would also dramatically increase the rate of evolution (which is required by the fossil record).

We know this can happen. The HOW I outlined above is speculative but plausible. Example identical twin astronaut who went to space and came back with different DNA than his twin.

< I'd rather say math is gay and wrong than admit life is a creation of intelligence and not chance
That's pretty much the entire ethos of evolution "science." People want an excuse to be depraved, and jews gladly give them the excuses in exchange for shekels and destruction of civilization.

Attached: mental.jpg (377x279, 22.28K)

Where are your math proving that we should not exist, Jethro?

See this faggot right here? He will literally say the most retarded things to protect his religion for perverts. He's into something really gross to say something this painfully stupid. Probably a pedophile, but maybe even something more disgusting than that, if possible.

Attached: RNAcoding.png (552x576, 48.93K)

...

Never seen a Tomato or a Banana, user?

Space can actually alter the DNA? That is very interesting.

Cosmic radiation is a more plausible cause than space viruses.

Did he have cancer?

He's right, user. Any system that picks from randomly generated pieces of information based on the utility of those pieces of information will eventually come to resemble something that looks very intentional. Check out this web simulation that illustrates my point rednuht.org/genetic_walkers/. You'll notice that every generation many of the walkers fail, only a handful are considered "successful." However, after many generation, say 100 or so, the walkers will appear as though someone designed them from the start to walk. However, you can observe that this is not the case.

It is more likely that particles of cosmic radiation (read: sunlight, just not the visible kind) bombarded his body while he was in space, damaging fragments of his DNA and altering it so that it would later appear different from his twins. The same thing happens when you go outside on a clear sunny day, but not to the same extent since Earth's atmosphere and magnetic field block a great deal of harmful solar radiation.

OP you're a dunce
look up evolutionary computing and watch a video on computers learning to play fucking soytendo, perhaps you'll be able to wrap your brain around it

I guess if the space technology is advanced enough to create a colony in the space then they will want to create a eugenic program that improve the immunity against the radiations.

< posts a picture of evolutionists saying it is code
MUH STRAWMAN!!!11!

This is why you can safely ignore anything an evolutionist says. Their goalposts are attached to tank treads and are in constant motion. It's almost like people who need to believe in something that excuses their repulsive depravity also excuses jew-level lying and nigger-level stupidity.

Most genetic mutations ARE harmful. The vast majority. It is the tiny portion that are beneficial or at least not harmful that are or can be worthwhile and be selected for. This IS how ALL evolution occurs.
Secondly, "genetic diversity" is not inherently "good." You only think so because the kike media and kike teachers are constantly screeching about being "diverse" as a means to push the multicult agenda. Too much genetic diversity is BAD because it reduces the ability of the animal/ plant to "breed true" and consistently pass winning traits onto their offspring. Likewise, too little genetic diversity is also usually bad because it reduces the ability of the population to hold onto dormant or recessive genes that can be useful to allow natural selection due to changing conditions. It is a middling amount of genetic diversity that is usually best for wild populations.
Third, the accumulation of beneficial or non-harmful mutations in populations occurs over MILLIONS of years. Actual evolution can occur much faster when there is a sufficient "trigger" for selection pressure. This is described as "punctuated equilibrium" and is one form of evolution.

No.
You understand very little about what you are talking about.
The genetic diversity that has, through artificial selection, led to the many different dog breeds today was ALREADY PRESENT in the wolf ancestors of today's dogs. Genetics are a very complex thing, and you do not understand it at all.

That's what you claim.
You sound to me like someone who wants proof that microbes exist but refuses to look through a microscope.

What is this, scientology?
gas yourself.

125,000 years ago? That's it?
That's all it took to go from brown bear to obviously very different polar bear?
White people had been evolving separately from other humans (with only very limited contact) for about that long…..
Hmmmmmm…….

No.
Uncuck your mind.

Again, numerous mutations that are not particularly harmful end up in the gene pool of a population as dormant or recessive genes over thousands, or even millions of years. The population can remain pretty much the same on average over this time. A later critical selection pressure (crisis) can lead to drastic change in the population or the splitting of the population into several diverging groups that can draw upon the latent mutations to, through selection pressure affecting the ability to successfully have and raise offspring, change the population drastically and rapidly.

This.

Because society props them up. "Modern" society has destroyed all positive selection pressure on humans and is actually REWARDING idiots and garbage people. Look at who tends to have the most babies, and, biologically, that is ALL life is about (successfully breeding and those offspring going on to successfully breed and so on)
This is why some measure of eugenics are ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE. Otherwise, everything is going into the shitter.

Gas yourself.
Moron.

You just love your jewish fairy tales, eh cuck?

No.
DNA is not "written"
It arises from countless gorillions of random mutations that are then tested through selection pressure and those that increase ability to successfully raise offspring are selected for.
Randomness is at the CORE of DNA. It is an endless waltz between the randomness of mutation and the permanence of eternal selection pressure to survive.
Furthermore, "self learning" AI that uses recursive logic and random guesses is a closer approximation than "code."
Furthermore, your "statistics" are highly suspect.

He was blacklisted for telling the TRUTH because of political correctness and kike controlled academia.
Both genetic evolution and cognitive differences between races are TRUE.
Gas yourself.
You anti-racist retards are a disgrace.

And now you see why the Greeks were able to defeat the Persians in war several times, despite the Persians having MANY times the lands and population of the Greeks.

Saying that does not make it true.
No matter how many times you do.

This

This.
Also, the VAST majority of dog breeds arose in the last several hundred years (due to "dog breeding" becoming a popular hobby), with a few going back a few thousand.

No. Embracing the reality of genetics and heredity in humans naturally leads to an OPPOSITION to depravity and degeneracy. Because things will not just "be okay" if we allow the genetics of our people to go to shit through dysgenic social practices.

i thought you were calling him a genetic failure, slightly chuckled

too bad natural selection isn't allowed to take course anymore. we have all these genetic defects living on incredibly expensive meds under the guise that we're all equal and all capable of doing the same things because everything has to be a social construct otherwise women get offended, and we have to pay for their butthurt.

lots of things can alter dna, and you would be surprised to know how messy dna recombination and replication can be.
t. biology major

When we simulate evolution - digital genes and a fitness measure - it seems to work. The stumbling blocks are creating a good fitness function and mapping genotype to phenotype, it's almost never the basic concepts of mating & mutation not working.
boxcar2d.com
picbreeder.org

Don't forget to sage and report.

We should study Deinococcus SNA self-repair mechanisms, though it comes with the risk of slowing down evolutionary rate, Deinococcids are, according to Thomas Cavalier Smith, the second most primitive organisms in existence after all.

You just make me curious about the effects on downies in the space.

Tell them that they are entitled to their opinion and change the topic. You can't educate a brain-damaged biological garbage bag. Wasting time debating retards irl is a crime since you could be researching or reviewing peers. Give people the level of discourse they deserve, not what they feel entitled to.

We need to research more than just that. We should find the specific DNA code that can resist the cancer in the animals and try to find the specific cancer resistance DNA based on that in human DNA. Elephants and naked moles are known to be resistant to the cancer.

We don't tend to refer to positive mutations as mutations. In any case, acquired immunity to antibiotics in bacteria is the result of mutation and therefore you're wrong anyway.

yes, it reduces genetic diversity within a given environment/niche. but there are many environments and niches to adapt to. so two subsets of a single species who are reproductively isolated will become distinct from one another.

you don't understand natural selection. the environment we have created is the environment we are adapting to. Natural selection never stops. NEVER.
unless all life on earth died of course but that's not happening any time soon

Maybe in an unchanging environment - such an environment doesn't exist in nature.

Beneficial mutations are extremely rare, which is why it's mutation and natural selection. The destructive mutations are removed, only the beneficial ones remain.
Fitness is situational. If the environment changes radically in half of a species' range, the population of the species in that half of the range will be adapted by natural selection to suit its new environment (provided it doesn't die out completely, which is possible), while the population in the unchanged half will continue on its previous course. Over time, this can lead to very different organisms.