Human race evolving new capabilities due to rapid population growth?

_{Denyse O'Leary

August 13, 2013

Human evolution, News}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Discover Magazine tells us that “Fast population growth has littered our genomes with five times as many rare gene variants as would be expected”:

All of these mutations — roughly 100 billion for each generation in the entire population — potentially accelerate the pace of evolution by giving it more raw materials with which to work. A small percentage may be beneficial; abilities such as digesting milk in adulthood and living at high altitude are recent acquisitions of the human genome. Given how many mutations are now circulating among living humans, we may be evolving new capabilities already.

Like the ability to spell P-O-P-P-Y-C-O-C-K?

But, come to think of it, my relatives are evolving already. They all seem older, greyer, … 😉

Comments

BA77 How do they know the "high altitude" trait was the result of a more recent mutation .... instead of being an older naturally occurring variation in the gene pool ??? (of course the linked article in the OP assumes unguided evolution)Johnnyfarmer_{August 13, 2013
August
08
Aug
13
13
2013
10:25 AM
10
10
25
AM
PDT}

as to:
A small percentage may be beneficial; abilities such as digesting milk in adulthood and living at high altitude are recent acquisitions of the human genome.
Though beneficial in their particular environments, these mutations are both actually found to be deleterious at the molecular level: Professional evolutionary biologists are hard-pressed to cite even one clear-cut example of evolution through a beneficial mutation to the DNA of humans which would violate the principle of genetic entropy. Although a materialist may try to claim the lactase persistence mutation as a lonely example of a 'truly' beneficial mutation in humans, lactase persistence is actually a loss of a instruction in the genome to turn the lactase enzyme off, so the mutation clearly does not violate Genetic Entropy. Moreover it clearly appears to be a 'designed mutation' that has 'serendipitously' originated independently three different times:
Convergent adaptation of human lactase persistence in Africa and Europe Excerpt: We conducted a genotype-phenotype association study in 470 Tanzanians, Kenyans and Sudanese and identified three SNPs (G/C-14010, T/G-13915 and C/G-13907) that are associated with lactase persistence and that have derived alleles that significantly enhance transcription from the LCT promoter in vitro. These SNPs originated on different haplotype backgrounds from the European C/T-13910 SNP and from each other. http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v39/n1/full/ng1946.html
As well, recently new rare 'beneficial' mutations were found in Tibetans that have allowed them to survive in extremely high altitudes, with less oxygen. Yet once again the new 'beneficial mutations' are actually found to be 'slightly detrimnetal' because they in fact result in a limit on the red cell blood count for Tibetans:
Tibetans Developed Genes to Help Them Adapt to Life at High Elevations - May 2010 Excerpt: "What's unique about Tibetans is they don't develop high red blood cells counts," http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100513143453.htm
Yet high red blood cell counts are found to be good,,
Extremely fit individuals may have higher values—significantly more red cells in their bodies and significantly more oxygen-carrying capacity—but still maintain normal hematocrit values. http://wiki.medpedia.com/Red_Blood_Cells#How_It_Works
,,,Thus they were actually incorrect to imply/assume that all high red blood cell counts found in humans are detrimental,,, Thus this is clearly another example of a loss of overall functional information, and fitness, from the human genome. This following article goes into more detail and points out many other inconsistencies with the Tibetan mutations that evaporate any claim for evidence of a 'truly' beneficial mutation:
Tibetans Evolved Altitude Tolerance in 3,000 Years? - July 2010 http://www.creationsafaris.com/crev201007.htm#20100703a
As well neo-Darwinism presupposes that the 'beneficial mutations' which conferred the advantage for Tibetans to live at high altitudes was completely random, yet when looked at from the point of population genetics, the evidence gives every indication that the 'beneficial mutations' were not random at all but, as with lactase persistence, were in fact 'directed/programmed' mutations that were targeted:
Another Darwinian “Prediction” Bites the Dust - PaV - August 2010 Excerpt: this means the probability of all three sites changing “at once” (6.25 X 10^-9)^2 = approx. 4 X 10^-17 specific bp change/ yr. IOW (In Other Words), for that size population, and this is a very reasonable guess for size, it would take almost twice the life of the universe for them to take place “at once”. Thus, the invocation of “randomness” in this whole process is pure nonsense. We’re dealing with some kind of programmed response if, in fact, “polygenic selection” is taking place. And, that, of course, means design. https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/another-darwinian-prediction-bites-the-dust/#more-14516
Footnotes: the evidence for the detrimental nature of mutations in humans is overwhelming for scientists have already cited over 100,000 mutational disorders. Inside the Human Genome: A Case for Non-Intelligent Design - Pg. 57 By John C. Avise Excerpt: "Another compilation of gene lesions responsible for inherited diseases is the web-based Human Gene Mutation Database (HGMD). Recent versions of HGMD describe more than 75,000 different disease causing mutations identified to date in Homo-sapiens." I went to the mutation database website cited by John Avise and found: HGMD®: Now celebrating our 100,000 mutation milestone! http://www.hgmd.org/ I really question their use of the word 'celebrating'. (Of note, apparently someone with a sense of decency has now removed the word 'celebrating') Dr. John Sanford "Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome" 1/2 - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJ-4umGkgos Genetic Entropy in Human Genome is found to be 'recent': Human Genetic Variation Recent, Varies Among Populations - (Nov. 28, 2012) Excerpt: Nearly three-quarters of mutations in genes that code for proteins -- the workhorses of the cell -- occurred within the past 5,000 to 10,000 years,,, "One of the most interesting points is that Europeans have more new deleterious (potentially disease-causing) mutations than Africans,",,, "Having so many of these new variants can be partially explained by the population explosion in the European population. However, variation that occur in genes that are involved in Mendelian traits and in those that affect genes essential to the proper functioning of the cell tend to be much older." (A Mendelian trait is controlled by a single gene. Mutations in that gene can have devastating effects.) The amount variation or mutation identified in protein-coding genes (the exome) in this study is very different from what would have been seen 5,000 years ago,,, The report shows that "recent" events have a potent effect on the human genome. Eighty-six percent of the genetic variation or mutations that are expected to be harmful arose in European-Americans in the last five thousand years, said the researchers. The researchers used established bioinformatics techniques to calculate the age of more than a million changes in single base pairs (the A-T, C-G of the genetic code) that are part of the exome or protein-coding portion of the genomes (human genetic blueprint) of 6,515 people of both European-American and African-American decent.,,, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121128132259.htmbornagain77_{August 13, 2013
August
08
Aug
13
13
2013
09:16 AM
9
09
16
AM
PDT}

@Johnnyfarmer #2: How will evolution select for that ???? How does "technological evolution select for" (create) all the new technologies that appeared last ten or twenty years? That's exactly how "biological evolution selects for" (creates) its innovations. The only difference is that instead of networks of neurons which come up with inventions, it is the cellular biochemical networks that do the required computations in the case of biological evolution. Such networks with adaptable links (mathematically modeled by neural networks) are distributed, self-programming computers running the same kind of general optimization algorithms.nightlight_{August 13, 2013
August
08
Aug
13
13
2013
08:46 AM
8
08
46
AM
PDT}

If one is lactose intolerant then one can take digestive enzymes, especially those containing lactase. After a long swim or other type of workout I love my protein shakes made with milk. But I always take my enzymes up to 1/2 hour before I enjoy. The point being is we no longer require "evolution" to help us because we have helped ourselves.Joe_{August 13, 2013
August
08
Aug
13
13
2013
08:28 AM
8
08
28
AM
PDT}

I think I have a solution to the problem @ 2 Humans would have needed to evolve in an environment where the only adult drink was milk !!!Johnnyfarmer_{August 13, 2013
August
08
Aug
13
13
2013
08:04 AM
8
08
04
AM
PDT}

A race of people who can digest milk in adulthood !!!! How will evolution select for that ???? Again would someone please spin me a "just so" narrative.Johnnyfarmer_{August 13, 2013
August
08
Aug
13
13
2013
07:55 AM
7
07
55
AM
PDT}

'But, come to think of it, my relatives are evolving already. They all seem older, greyer...' Only your relatives, eh, News? Lucky you!Axel_{August 13, 2013
August
08
Aug
13
13
2013
06:51 AM
6
06
51
AM
PDT}

Prev 1 2

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply