Evolution, through selecting

[AntarcticBarbecue]

As most know Chimpanzees have over 90% of genes in their DNA that is very close to Humane DNA. As many others know humans in pregnant themselves with selective sperm to have children that have genes of a progressive/smart/attractive person.

What I think could be done is, is that we could selectively breed Chimpanzees that have closer to human genes than the average Chimpanzee. In about 100 years or less we could have formed a hairless Chimpanzee, then soon a Chimpanzee that walks on 2 feet at all times, then progressively into a talking Chimpanzee.

Though as far as I know is that the Government or a private Science testing lab has already tried this.

The only thing I could ever think bad about this is...

PLANET OF THE APES D:

Do you think this is possible?

[satanbrain]

possible, yeah. but it will take a long time.

[rsslee43]

plantet of the apes? nah impossible, we evolved because our earth gravity, pressure and atomosphere. To get the same thing would be.... impossible.

[Sheizenhammer]

I think a more important question is: why would you want to do that anyway?

For a 'slave race'? That's what robots are being invented for.
"Proof of concept" (that's scientific jargon for "'cos we fucking can")? Again, point?

These things don't just take time; they cost a lot of money and other resources to do as well. Meaning that, without a clear (and good) reason for it, no government will spend money on it.

[SadisticMonkey]

Take AGES, and there's no real incentive to do so.

[RubberTrucky]

I wonder actually how much DNA alone causes one animal to be this way and others to be entirely different. Not really scientific, but I remember the quote from House MD
"If her DNA was off by one percentage point, she'd be a dolphin."
Apparently creatures with very similar DNA structures can look entirely different, like millions of miles away from eachother. Wasn't there the thing that our DNA is quite similar to that of an earthworm?

[AntarcticBarbecue]

At 4/25/09 07:05 AM, RubberTrucky wrote: I wonder actually how much DNA alone causes one animal to be this way and others to be entirely different. Not really scientific, but I remember the quote from House MD
"If her DNA was off by one percentage point, she'd be a dolphin."
Apparently creatures with very similar DNA structures can look entirely different, like millions of miles away from eachother. Wasn't there the thing that our DNA is quite similar to that of an earthworm?

I don't believe that we are this close to dolphins and earthworms, but 7 is the same amount of vertebrate in the necks of both mammals and birds. Our genes are far, but close enough to have odd coincidences that result in the thought of evolution.

[1Tyla1]

Human Egg Cell + Dog Sperm Cell = A Bitch at birth.

[C-Hawk]

At 4/25/09 06:53 AM, rsslee43 wrote: plantet of the apes? nah impossible, we evolved because our earth gravity, pressure and atomosphere. To get the same thing would be.... impossible.

In Science, there is one taboo word: "impossible". - One of the most influential people in my life.
I've often thought of the intricacies of selective evolution in humans. Having athletic people reproduce only with athletic, and intellectual people with intellectual people, and other "castes". Something like what is seen in The Time Machine.

[dercheezle]

At 4/25/09 07:05 AM, RubberTrucky wrote: I wonder actually how much DNA alone causes one animal to be this way and others to be entirely different. Not really scientific, but I remember the quote from House MD
"If her DNA was off by one percentage point, she'd be a dolphin."

You have to understand that very small sections of DNA can have a huge impact on the type and amount of protein produced. Our DNA is slightly unique in the animal kingdom in that multiple genes interact with each other in order to get more functionality from fewer genes. Organisms like houseflies have genes that code for one specific trait only, but ours are integrated.

Should you change just one codon, you could end up with a ton of different results because it would change the shape of every single one of the proteins that it partially codes for, and possibly others.

Also: DNA essentially shapes the entirety of how your cells function and are structured. So to answer your question, yes small changes in DNA completely shape why one organism is different from another.

Also: 1% of over a billion genes is still leaves around 10 million that separate us from dolphins.

[C-Hawk]

At 4/25/09 07:05 AM, RubberTrucky wrote: Wasn't there the thing that our DNA is quite similar to that of an earthworm?

Human DNA is 70% similar to that of a slug. To give you an idea of how much "30%" is when talking about DNA, say "Yes" out loud 99 times and "No" one time. Now imagine that in the billions' range.

[Brick-top]

At 4/25/09 06:46 AM, satanbrain wrote: possible, yeah. but it will take a long time.

No it's not. Humans have 46 Chromosomes, Chimpanzee's have 48. They've evolved separately to the point of no return.

[ThoseSneakyFrench]

Evolution takes place over THOUSANDS of years, not decades. Even if your theory had merit, it would take too long.

[C-Hawk]

At 4/25/09 09:41 AM, Brick-top wrote:

At 4/25/09 06:46 AM, satanbrain wrote: possible, yeah. but it will take a long time.

No it's not. Humans have 46 Chromosomes, Chimpanzee's have 48. They've evolved separately to the point of no return.

So you're saying that if i were to cross-breed dogs such as the
Pinscher, the Beauceron, the Rottweiler, the Thuringian Sylvan Dog, the black Greyhound, the Great Dane, the Weimaraner, the German Shorthaired Pointer, the Manchester Terrier and the old German Shepherd Dog
I wouldn't end up with a Doberman Pinscher?
The OP is suggesting that a reoccurrence of the events that lead to human evolution would result in a near-human being. Doesn't sound too far-fetched to me.

[Brick-top]

At 4/25/09 09:54 AM, C-Hawk wrote: The OP is suggesting that a reoccurrence of the events that lead to human evolution would result in a near-human being. Doesn't sound too far-fetched to me.

And how do you expect to get chromosomal fusion?

[Leninist]

If anyone was to do this it would take either Millions of Years. Or we'd need to do some really advanced Gene Work.

So, at the moment, with our Technology, not possible for it to get done in our lifetime.

[C-Hawk]

At 4/25/09 09:58 AM, Brick-top wrote: And how do you expect to get chromosomal fusion?

The same way it happened to us over millions of years, as the poster below you stated.

[GiantDouche]

Evolution takes hundreds of thousands of years you idiot.

[Brick-top]

At 4/25/09 10:01 AM, C-Hawk wrote:

At 4/25/09 09:58 AM, Brick-top wrote: And how do you expect to get chromosomal fusion?

The same way it happened to us over millions of years, as the poster below you stated.

Evolutionary process isn't entirely dictated to by the environment. Mutations are random and we have no way to naturally dictate the exact same occurrences which lead to our evolutionary status.

Listen, it can not be done.

[C-Hawk]

At 4/25/09 10:07 AM, Brick-top wrote: Evolutionary process isn't entirely dictated to by the environment. Mutations are random and we have no way to naturally dictate the exact same occurrences which lead to our evolutionary status.

Hence words like "near-human" and "talking chimpanzee".

Listen, it can not be done.

OK, we have different opinions. In the traditional Internet cerimonial way, let's flame each other over PMs now.

[Brick-top]

At 4/25/09 10:13 AM, C-Hawk wrote: Hence words like "near-human" and "talking chimpanzee".

Chimpanzee's already have a communication system and to be like 'near-human' they'd need more than a 95% similar genome. If cannot be done without the usage of technological interference which wouldn't be evolution at all. It'd be genetic manipulation.

Listen, it can not be done.

OK, we have different opinions. In the traditional Internet cerimonial way, let's flame each other over PMs now.

Been there, done it got the Tshirt and it's pointless.

[Akkryls]

I'd say yes.... Just to prove to these "Science-is-a-lie"-christians once and for all that we did evolve and didn't randomly pop up on the face of the planet one day....

[JohnnyWang]

That 10% makes a world of difference, you know. And the effects stack. it's a bit complicated but basically, you can't just breed them to become more man-like. Drastic changeds only happen when they're eeded, and the time it takes a strain of chimps to evolve into humans would take millions of years.

[AapoJoki]

It's possible to breed smarter chimps, but it's not possible to turn them into humans. We're not directly descended from them, we're their cousins. If we wanted to make humans out of them, we would first have to reverse their evolution back to our common ancestral form, and then replicate every single mutation it took for them to become humans. Even if this was the slightest bit feasible, it would be extremely laborious, slow, expensive and pointless.

[6r0undZ3r0]

It'd take quite a while to get them from their current ape status to walking and talking. And I haven't a clue why anyone would want to do that anyway.

[tigerkitty]

At 4/25/09 10:13 AM, C-Hawk wrote: OK, we have different opinions. In the traditional Internet cerimonial way, let's flame each other over PMs now.

You're arguing more for the ability of science (given eternity) than for what is actually being proposed here.

While I agree that given an infinite amount of time, anything is possible, I also realize the constraints of reality and where technology is.

Yes, we can map a genome, but to sit down and comb through it is an entirely different matter. We barely know what sections of our own DNA strands are coding for, it's almost farcical to think we have the ability to individually select a chimp's DNA that is more similar to a humans than another chimp's DNA.

Leaving aside the ethics of this, as I know scientists like to do, the mechanics of it are tedious as best. He's proposing to turn one species into another through selective breeding. If I follow what he is suggesting that would assume factors like bipedalism and speech are specifically genetically coded for and not the result of other factors that drive species change.

I have absolute faith in science, but I also am firmly grounded in reality and rationalism.

[Bassanova-001]

At 4/25/09 10:57 AM, Akkryls wrote: I'd say yes.... Just to prove to these "Science-is-a-lie"-christians once and for all that we did evolve and didn't randomly pop up on the face of the planet one day....

I acctualy have proof that we did evolve. Try googleing "mudskipper". It is a fish and anphibian.
Eat that.

[Andsoitbegins]

I don't understand, do you want to make more humans out of apes?
That sounds like the biggest waste of money and time.