- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If we cloned ancient human DNA would they be deficient today?
Posted on 8/3/20 at 6:12 am to Korkstand
Posted on 8/3/20 at 6:12 am to Korkstand
quote:
You don't think that our co-evolution with viruses and bacteria could make an ancient human more susceptible today? Don't we benefit from the fact that our ancestors were the ones who survived thousands of years of outbreaks of disease? Our genes are the ones that survived the filters of past pandemics.
Not significantly out of the range of current modern variation, no. And it might even be a net gain. Remember that pretty much all Caucasians were hard selected for any traits that helped against the Black Plague and everything else went into the fire.
It won’t be like war of the worlds where minor illnesses like the cold are suddenly lethal. They’ll just need to be heavily vaccin’d up. To give them the immune response they missed out from their mother.
Or incubate the ancient human in a surrogate.
This post was edited on 8/3/20 at 6:18 am
0
Posted on 8/3/20 at 7:30 am to Kujo
I’ll tell you this... if you took a field worker from Ancient Greece or Rome and transported him to today, you would be shocked at how strong they are.
We have better food and bigger builds, but those folks from the past were rock solid. I would t want to mess with one.
We have better food and bigger builds, but those folks from the past were rock solid. I would t want to mess with one.
Posted on 8/3/20 at 8:16 am to Kujo
If by deficient you mean able to take care of themselves without help from the government then yes.
Posted on 8/3/20 at 8:37 am to Korkstand
quote:
I would guess 100k+ years, but maybe a lot further back than that. I don't think our skulls have changed much for about 200k years, and actually our brains have been getting smaller recently.
Brain size may not have changed much over the years but the centers within the brain have assuredly evolved over the millennia. For instance, the medulla, responsible for instinctive survival, was likely much larger 50K years ago when humans had to rely heavily on natural, violent or evasive instinct to survive. Over the years, the need for a 'strong' medulla has likely lessened and, with it, the amount of neurons shooting through that portion of the brain.
Posted on 8/3/20 at 8:45 am to Kujo
quote:
If we got the go ahead for a worldwide project to clone hundreds of ancient humans in say 5 groups of 10k years old, 5k years old, 2k, 1k and 500 years old, and raised them as normal children would they have a harder time in school?
How much different is our brain today than 2k years ago? Is 2k years of "evolution" indistinguishable?
There would probably be very little difference, as the human genome is only about 25,000 genes, and the difference between two people is only 100-120 genes.
The examples you used are environmentally contingent processes.
Posted on 8/3/20 at 8:46 am to The Pirate King
quote:
I would assume their immune systems (or lack there of) would get them killed.
That's not how immunity or the immune system works.
Posted on 8/3/20 at 9:44 am to Kujo
You are a product of your environment as much as you are your genetics. There are some conditions that might dramatically hinder your development, but they would do that no matter when you were born.
I know some really dumb people that have had really smart kids. So it's possible to surpass your genetics and do just fine.
I know some really dumb people that have had really smart kids. So it's possible to surpass your genetics and do just fine.
Posted on 8/3/20 at 9:47 am to Korkstand
quote:
and Koko the gorilla supposedly had an IQ of 75+ and could understand 2,000 words.
Damn, Koko is smarter than most of the OT.
Posted on 8/3/20 at 9:47 am to The Great Hambino
When did dogs become domesticated from their wolf ancestors? We see domesticated wild animals like Siegfried and the Roy's tigers, but they aren't fully domesticated.
When did man become domesticated?
When did man become domesticated?
Posted on 8/3/20 at 9:57 am to Kujo
quote:
When did dogs become domesticated from their wolf ancestors?
An incredibly complicated question, but the divergence between grey wolves and modern dogs started between 50k ya to 15k ya.
quote:
We see domesticated wild animals like Siegfried and the Roy's tigers, but they aren't fully domesticated.
Domestication means that there is genetic alteration of a specific breed lineage. Siegfried and Roy's tigers were tamed, not domesticated.
quote:
When did man become domesticated?
This is a weird question in context, but if you're asking when humans started sedentary, relatively permanent settlements in proximity to domesticated plants, then the Neolithic Revolution would be the answer. Which corresponded with a decrease in average height and a host of nutritional deficiencies. Sedentary lifestyles lead to an increased specialization of labor, which led to the organization of society that was relatively similar in all agrarian societies.
Posted on 8/3/20 at 10:06 am to Kujo
quote:
if we went back 50k to 80k years ago? How about 150k to 400k years ago. How many thousands of years back into human evolution would we have to clone before you would definitely say...."yeah, they would struggle?"
Well, most paleoanthropologists say that modern man emereged about 300,000 years ago. This most recent estimate is up from 200,000 years because of new discoveries.
People from that period could be dressed in modern clothing and would be indistinguishable from any of us. So, in stature and appearance they were the same as us.
However, there is one organ that didn’t become modern until about 60,000 years ago, the brain. That’s when the “light of creativity” came on in our ancestors. Creative Man began to use symbology and language at a hyper level.
If we could go back in time and transport a baby from then to present time, it could be raised to become an optimally functioning member of society. Before then, any child would struggle to fit in.
This post was edited on 8/3/20 at 10:22 am
Posted on 8/3/20 at 10:07 am to Kujo
quote:we were kings
In the first half of the 18th century, the average height of an English male was 165 cm (5 ft 5 in)
Posted on 8/3/20 at 10:09 am to crazy4lsu
quote:It's hard to believe that in 50k years we've transformed the magnificent wolf into the bumbling idiot that attacks random shrubs when I take her for a walk.
An incredibly complicated question, but the divergence between grey wolves and modern dogs started between 50k ya to 15k ya.
Posted on 8/3/20 at 10:09 am to Kujo
It depends on the point at which the aliens spliced their DNA into ours.
Posted on 8/3/20 at 10:22 am to northshorebamaman
quote:
It's hard to believe that in 50k years we've transformed the magnificent wolf into the bumbling idiot that attacks random shrubs when I take her for a walk.
It certainly is a strong argument against the artificial selection. As is the cultivation of certain plants, like the banana.
Posted on 8/3/20 at 10:45 am to northshorebamaman
quote:
It's hard to believe that in 50k years we've transformed the magnificent wolf into the bumbling idiot that attacks random shrubs when I take her for a walk
In fairness to wolves and dogs, a genetic mutation was responsible for splitting off the Canis lupus familiaris subspecies from the wolf. Humans weren’t responsible for that.
The mutation made the dog subspecies less afraid of humans and more willing to associate with them. Once humans determined that there was more to be gained from allying with dogs than eating them, a symbiotic relationship evolved between the two species. In effect, dogs and humans domesticated each other.
One of my favorite observations is the continuing evolution of dogs with human-like traits such as empathy and caring. Human selection, in contrast to natural selection, is creating a species that mimicks us. My observations show that dogs have starkly different interactions with each other than they do with humans. Both traits, however, appear to be innate, not learned.
Posted on 8/3/20 at 10:46 am to Kujo
Don't we have enough problems while playing God with viruses? Now you want to delve into human cloning from another time period? WTF is wrong with you?
Posted on 8/3/20 at 10:50 am to Landmass
Ancient man would face a greater likelihood of beIng eaten alive hunting modern mammoth.
Posted on 8/3/20 at 11:35 am to crazy4lsu
quote:You could probably say that for most plants that have been cultivated on a large scale from a nutritional standpoint. Most of the focus has been on increasing yields.
As is the cultivation of certain plants, like the banana.
Posted on 8/3/20 at 12:04 pm to Korkstand
quote:Koko was a fraud and could not do all of those things.
Chimps and gorillas can learn sign language and how to use tools, and Koko the gorilla supposedly had an IQ of 75+ and could understand 2,000 words. If they can learn that much with brains 1/3rd the size of ours
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News