| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jon Skinner" |
| Date: |
15 Nov 2005 03:35:03 AM |
| Object: |
Speaking of mutations... |
....I am one.
It's true. A couple of years back I had to get my kidneys x-rayed after
an accident. They pumped me full of some radioactive stuff and took
pictures of me insides. When the doctor was looking at the results he
said "That's a bit wierd..."
It turns out I have two tubes going from kidney to bladder, on both
sides, where there's only supposed to be one. The doctor wasn't all that
concerned about it, and said it's "just one of those glitches that turn
up in reproduction sometimes". Fairly common, apparently. Some people
get six toes; I got two tubes. Bully for me.
I didn't keep the x-rays, but wish I had so that I could wave them in
the face of any passing creationist who wants 'proof' of evolution.
Well... okay, it's not proof of evolution, but it's the sort of mutation
that is the raw material of evolution. I wish I could think of a
situation where it would give me a survival advantage though - then I'd
have an argument for the fundies. As it is, I can always ask "How come
God fucked up my innards? - Was he pissed or something?"
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation debate for
me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation to prove it!
--
Jon
a.a.#277
.
|
|
| User: "Therion Ware" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 04:11:02 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 20:05:03 +1030 in alt.atheism, Jon Skinner
(jskinner@senet.com.au (Jon Skinner)) said, directing the reply to
alt.atheism
...I am one.
It's true. A couple of years back I had to get my kidneys x-rayed after
an accident. They pumped me full of some radioactive stuff and took
pictures of me insides. When the doctor was looking at the results he
said "That's a bit wierd..."
It turns out I have two tubes going from kidney to bladder,
All together now: "You're taking the *****"....!
on both
sides, where there's only supposed to be one. The doctor wasn't all that
concerned about it, and said it's "just one of those glitches that turn
up in reproduction sometimes". Fairly common, apparently. Some people
get six toes; I got two tubes. Bully for me.
I didn't keep the x-rays, but wish I had so that I could wave them in
the face of any passing creationist who wants 'proof' of evolution.
Well... okay, it's not proof of evolution, but it's the sort of mutation
that is the raw material of evolution. I wish I could think of a
situation where it would give me a survival advantage though - then I'd
have an argument for the fundies. As it is, I can always ask "How come
God fucked up my innards? - Was he pissed or something?"
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation debate for
me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation to prove it!
I wonder if the mutation will be passed on, or if any of your
antecedents had the same thing.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 05:37:05 AM |
|
|
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in alt.atheism
in alt.atheism, Jon Skinner said
...I am one.
It's true. A couple of years back I had to get my kidneys x-rayed after
an accident. They pumped me full of some radioactive stuff and took
pictures of me insides. When the doctor was looking at the results he
said "That's a bit wierd..."
It turns out I have two tubes going from kidney to bladder,
All together now: "You're taking the *****"....!
Surely such a mutation could help one drink more beer, right?
on both sides, where there's only supposed to be one. The doctor wasn't
all that concerned about it, and said it's "just one of those glitches that turn
up in reproduction sometimes". Fairly common, apparently. Some people
get six toes; I got two tubes. Bully for me.
I didn't keep the x-rays, but wish I had so that I could wave them in
the face of any passing creationist who wants 'proof' of evolution.
Well... okay, it's not proof of evolution, but it's the sort of mutation
that is the raw material of evolution. I wish I could think of a
situation where it would give me a survival advantage though - then I'd
have an argument for the fundies. As it is, I can always ask "How come
God fucked up my innards? - Was he pissed or something?"
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation debate for
me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation to prove it!
I wonder if the mutation will be passed on, or if any of your
antecedents had the same thing.
I was wondering the same thing, whether it was inheritable or not.
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their hearts
are on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem to cause any
problems for them. I guess it must be inheritable, but it's
recessive, since neither of their parents have the condition.
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 06:34:23 AM |
|
|
"Elroy Willis" <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:echjn1htj0jttj88skghn3dh6rpp50qcuh@4ax.com...
snip
I was wondering the same thing, whether it was inheritable or not.
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their hearts
are on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem to cause any
problems for them. I guess it must be inheritable, but it's
recessive, since neither of their parents have the condition.
I have a niece who has the same condition. Unfortunately, this is the same
niece born with the under-developed heart. One condition doesn't have
anything to do with the other - just a strange coincidence.
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
Science doesn't burn people at the stake for disagreeing - Vic Sagerquist
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 07:08:23 AM |
|
|
Robibnikoff <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message
I was wondering the same thing, whether it was inheritable or not.
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their hearts
are on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem to cause any
problems for them. I guess it must be inheritable, but it's
recessive, since neither of their parents have the condition.
I have a niece who has the same condition. Unfortunately, this is
the same niece born with the under-developed heart. One condition
doesn't have anything to do with the other - just a strange coincidence.
It's apparently more common than I thought. I figured maybe it was
one in a million or so, but it turns out it's around 1 in 6000.
I envisioned a story about it the other day...
Teacher: Class, put your hands over your hearts while we say the
pledge of allegiance.
All but one student places their right hand over their left chest,
while the one student places his left hand over his right chest.
The other students notice the lone student while they say the pledge.
During recess, they single him out and start calling him names.
Lefty! Weirdo! Freak! Sinister!
The schoolyard bully steals his lunch money.
Soon thereafter, the boys parents contact the ACLU and get the
school to do away with the hand-over-the-heart part of the pledge...
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 09:32:45 AM |
|
|
"Elroy Willis" <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:60mjn1poeaqm32lacuinb7o4m9rmgc0ivp@4ax.com...
Robibnikoff <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message
I was wondering the same thing, whether it was inheritable or not.
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their hearts
are on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem to cause any
problems for them. I guess it must be inheritable, but it's
recessive, since neither of their parents have the condition.
I have a niece who has the same condition. Unfortunately, this is
the same niece born with the under-developed heart. One condition
doesn't have anything to do with the other - just a strange coincidence.
It's apparently more common than I thought. I figured maybe it was
one in a million or so, but it turns out it's around 1 in 6000.
I didn't know it was that common either. At least in my niece's case, it
made her heart surgeries a little easier :/
I envisioned a story about it the other day...
Teacher: Class, put your hands over your hearts while we say the
pledge of allegiance.
All but one student places their right hand over their left chest,
while the one student places his left hand over his right chest.
The other students notice the lone student while they say the pledge.
During recess, they single him out and start calling him names.
Lefty! Weirdo! Freak! Sinister!
The schoolyard bully steals his lunch money.
Soon thereafter, the boys parents contact the ACLU and get the
school to do away with the hand-over-the-heart part of the pledge...
An Elroy classic in the making! :)
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 04:02:51 PM |
|
|
Robibnikoff <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message
Robibnikoff <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their hearts
are on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem to cause any
problems for them. I guess it must be inheritable, but it's
recessive, since neither of their parents have the condition.
I have a niece who has the same condition. Unfortunately, this is
the same niece born with the under-developed heart. One condition
doesn't have anything to do with the other - just a strange coincidence.
It's apparently more common than I thought. I figured maybe it was
one in a million or so, but it turns out it's around 1 in 6000.
I didn't know it was that common either. At least in my niece's case, it
made her heart surgeries a little easier :/
Easier how? :)
I envisioned a story about it the other day...
Teacher: Class, put your hands over your hearts while we say the
pledge of allegiance.
All but one student places their right hand over their left chest,
while the one student places his left hand over his right chest.
The other students notice the lone student while they say the pledge.
During recess, they single him out and start calling him names.
Lefty! Weirdo! Freak! Sinister!
The schoolyard bully steals his lunch money.
Soon thereafter, the boys parents contact the ACLU and get the
school to do away with the hand-over-the-heart part of the pledge...
An Elroy classic in the making! :)
It was replaced with an outstretched right arm, palm forward, facing
the flag, like the Nazi salute.
"eine nation unter Gott" indivisible, with liberty and justice for all
(except for gays, blacks, women, native americans, communists..).
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 11:12:48 PM |
|
|
Robibnikoff wrote:
"Elroy Willis" <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:60mjn1poeaqm32lacuinb7o4m9rmgc0ivp@4ax.com...
Robibnikoff <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in message
I was wondering the same thing, whether it was inheritable or not.
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their hearts
are on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem to cause any
problems for them. I guess it must be inheritable, but it's
recessive, since neither of their parents have the condition.
I have a niece who has the same condition. Unfortunately, this is
the same niece born with the under-developed heart. One condition
doesn't have anything to do with the other - just a strange coincidence.
It's apparently more common than I thought. I figured maybe it was
one in a million or so, but it turns out it's around 1 in 6000.
I didn't know it was that common either. At least in my niece's case, it
made her heart surgeries a little easier :/
I envisioned a story about it the other day...
Teacher: Class, put your hands over your hearts while we say the
pledge of allegiance.
All but one student places their right hand over their left chest,
while the one student places his left hand over his right chest.
The other students notice the lone student while they say the pledge.
During recess, they single him out and start calling him names.
Lefty! Weirdo! Freak! Sinister!
The schoolyard bully steals his lunch money.
Soon thereafter, the boys parents contact the ACLU and get the
school to do away with the hand-over-the-heart part of the pledge...
An Elroy classic in the making! :)
Maybe, but I'm a lefty, and a couple of years ago I read a book about
the history of lefties. *Not* a pretty read.
I was spared "handedness re-education", but I have a few aunts, uncles
and older cousins who did not, "thanks" to the catholic luminaries who
ran the schools...
--
Olrik
aa #1981
Qualified SMASH member
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Brian E. Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 10:52:15 AM |
|
|
In article <echjn1htj0jttj88skghn3dh6rpp50qcuh@4ax.com>, Elroy
Willis said...
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their hearts
are on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem to cause any
problems for them.
That's unfortunate, because when one of the cousins acts with
good intention but produces troublesome consequences, it's
impossible to say of him, "Well, his heart was in the right
place."
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 11:15:17 AM |
|
|
"Brian E. Clark" <reply@newsgroup.only.please> wrote in message
news:MPG.1de3dc4aa76d3dad98994f@newsgroups.comcast.net...
In article <echjn1htj0jttj88skghn3dh6rpp50qcuh@4ax.com>, Elroy
Willis said...
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their hearts
are on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem to cause any
problems for them.
That's unfortunate, because when one of the cousins acts with
good intention but produces troublesome consequences, it's
impossible to say of him, "Well, his heart was in the right
place."
Arrrrrrrrgh! ;)
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 03:48:21 PM |
|
|
Brian E. Clark <reply@newsgroup.only.please> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis said...
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their hearts
are on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem to cause any
problems for them.
That's unfortunate, because when one of the cousins acts with
good intention but produces troublesome consequences, it's
impossible to say of him, "Well, his heart was in the right
place."
<groan>
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 06:31:31 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 11:37:05 +0000, Elroy Willis wrote:
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in alt.atheism
in alt.atheism, Jon Skinner said
...I am one.
It's true. A couple of years back I had to get my kidneys x-rayed after
an accident. They pumped me full of some radioactive stuff and took
pictures of me insides. When the doctor was looking at the results he
said "That's a bit wierd..."
It turns out I have two tubes going from kidney to bladder,
All together now: "You're taking the *****"....!
Surely such a mutation could help one drink more beer, right?
on both sides, where there's only supposed to be one. The doctor wasn't
all that concerned about it, and said it's "just one of those glitches
that turn up in reproduction sometimes". Fairly common, apparently.
Some people get six toes; I got two tubes. Bully for me.
I didn't keep the x-rays, but wish I had so that I could wave them in
the face of any passing creationist who wants 'proof' of evolution.
Well... okay, it's not proof of evolution, but it's the sort of
mutation that is the raw material of evolution. I wish I could think of
a situation where it would give me a survival advantage though - then
I'd have an argument for the fundies. As it is, I can always ask "How
come God fucked up my innards? - Was he pissed or something?"
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation debate
for me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation to prove
it!
I wonder if the mutation will be passed on, or if any of your
antecedents had the same thing.
I was wondering the same thing, whether it was inheritable or not.
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their hearts are
on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem to cause any
problems for them. I guess it must be inheritable, but it's recessive,
since neither of their parents have the condition.
Most likely, you would inherit the *tendency* to have reversed organs,
duplicated ureters, etc. How such things turn out depends on multiple
factors, both local to the developing fetus, and genetic. How the factors
interact is not well understood.
--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 07:25:40 AM |
|
|
MarkA <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in alt.atheism
in alt.atheism, Jon Skinner said
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation debate
for me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation to prove
it!
I wonder if the mutation will be passed on, or if any of your
antecedents had the same thing.
I was wondering the same thing, whether it was inheritable or not.
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their hearts are
on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem to cause any
problems for them. I guess it must be inheritable, but it's recessive,
since neither of their parents have the condition.
Most likely, you would inherit the *tendency* to have reversed organs,
duplicated ureters, etc. How such things turn out depends on multiple
factors, both local to the developing fetus, and genetic. How the factors
interact is not well understood.
So it's different than things like having red hair, which is recessive
and needn't be present in either parent or even grandparents?
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Meteorite Debris" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 05:57:04 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 13:25:40 GMT the ET form known as Elroy
Willis<elroywillis@swbell.net> sent a radio signal across the vast
expanse of deep space -._.--._.--._.--._.--._.--._.
MarkA <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in alt.atheism
in alt.atheism, Jon Skinner said
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation debate
for me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation to prove
it!
I wonder if the mutation will be passed on, or if any of your
antecedents had the same thing.
I was wondering the same thing, whether it was inheritable or not.
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their hearts are
on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem to cause any
problems for them. I guess it must be inheritable, but it's recessive,
since neither of their parents have the condition.
Most likely, you would inherit the *tendency* to have reversed organs,
duplicated ureters, etc. How such things turn out depends on multiple
factors, both local to the developing fetus, and genetic. How the factors
interact is not well understood.
So it's different than things like having red hair, which is recessive
and needn't be present in either parent or even grandparents?
My mother had brown eyes and my father had blue eyes. Brown eyes are a
dominant trait over blue. Between 4 kids not one had brown eyes and 3
had blue eyes. The 4th were green.
--
Remove YOUR_SHOES before replying
apatriot #1, atheist #1417,
Chief EAC prophet
Jason Gastrich is praying for me on 8 January 2009
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~pk1956/
Apatriotism Yahoo Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/apatriotism
ASIO/DSD bait - terrorist, suicide bomber, al Qaida
:-P
.
|
|
|
| User: "kathryn" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
16 Nov 2005 01:46:59 PM |
|
|
"Meteorite Debris" <epicurus1@YOUR_SHOESoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:MPG.1de519d4cb65d8aa98a293@news.optusnet.com.au...
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 13:25:40 GMT the ET form known as Elroy
Willis<elroywillis@swbell.net> sent a radio signal across the vast
expanse of deep space -._.--._.--._.--._.--._.--._.
MarkA <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in alt.atheism
in alt.atheism, Jon Skinner said
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation debate
for me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation to prove
it!
I wonder if the mutation will be passed on, or if any of your
antecedents had the same thing.
I was wondering the same thing, whether it was inheritable or not.
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their hearts
are
on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem to cause any
problems for them. I guess it must be inheritable, but it's
recessive,
since neither of their parents have the condition.
Most likely, you would inherit the *tendency* to have reversed organs,
duplicated ureters, etc. How such things turn out depends on multiple
factors, both local to the developing fetus, and genetic. How the
factors
interact is not well understood.
So it's different than things like having red hair, which is recessive
and needn't be present in either parent or even grandparents?
My mother had brown eyes and my father had blue eyes. Brown eyes are a
dominant trait over blue. Between 4 kids not one had brown eyes and 3
had blue eyes. The 4th were green.
--
My dad has brown eyes and my mum and brother green. I have blue and I have
no idea why!
and no it wasn't the milk man
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sleepalot" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
16 Nov 2005 05:05:09 PM |
|
|
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote:
My dad has brown eyes and my mum and brother green. I have blue and I have
no idea why!
and no it wasn't the milk man
AIui...
you have two genes for eye colour, one from dad, and one from mum.
The colour of your eyes depends on which gene is dominant.
Brown is more dominant than green, which is more dominant than blue,
so to have blue eyes, you must have two "blue eye" genes.
Therefore your dads' genes are brown / blue , and your mums' are
green / blue.
(So, if you marry a bloke with blue eyes, you'd better not have
any brown-eyed babies ! ;-)
--
Sleepalot aa #1385
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 07:48:50 PM |
|
|
Meteorite Debris <epicurus1@YOUR_SHOESoptusnet.com.au> wrote in
news:MPG.1de519d4cb65d8aa98a293@news.optusnet.com.au:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 13:25:40 GMT the ET form known as Elroy
Willis<elroywillis@swbell.net> sent a radio signal across the vast
expanse of deep space -._.--._.--._.--._.--._.--._.
MarkA <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in alt.atheism
in alt.atheism, Jon Skinner said
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation
debate for me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the
mutation to prove it!
I wonder if the mutation will be passed on, or if any of your
antecedents had the same thing.
I was wondering the same thing, whether it was inheritable or not.
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their
hearts are on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem
to cause any problems for them. I guess it must be inheritable,
but it's recessive, since neither of their parents have the
condition.
Most likely, you would inherit the *tendency* to have reversed
organs, duplicated ureters, etc. How such things turn out depends
on multiple factors, both local to the developing fetus, and
genetic. How the factors interact is not well understood.
So it's different than things like having red hair, which is
recessive and needn't be present in either parent or even
grandparents?
My mother had brown eyes and my father had blue eyes. Brown eyes are a
dominant trait over blue. Between 4 kids not one had brown eyes and 3
had blue eyes. The 4th were green.
Mom was probably heterozygous for brown eyes.
(That's one brown and not-brown.)
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up
for something, sometime in your life." -- W. Churchill
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
17 Nov 2005 06:28:49 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:27:04 +1030, Meteorite Debris wrote:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 13:25:40 GMT the ET form known as Elroy
Willis<elroywillis@swbell.net> sent a radio signal across the vast expanse
of deep space -._.--._.--._.--._.--._.--._.
MarkA <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in alt.atheism
in alt.atheism, Jon Skinner said
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation
debate for me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation
to prove it!
I wonder if the mutation will be passed on, or if any of your
antecedents had the same thing.
I was wondering the same thing, whether it was inheritable or not.
I have two cousins whose internal organs are reversed. Their hearts
are on the opposite side than normal, but it doesn't seem to cause
any problems for them. I guess it must be inheritable, but it's
recessive, since neither of their parents have the condition.
Most likely, you would inherit the *tendency* to have reversed organs,
duplicated ureters, etc. How such things turn out depends on multiple
factors, both local to the developing fetus, and genetic. How the
factors interact is not well understood.
So it's different than things like having red hair, which is recessive
and needn't be present in either parent or even grandparents?
My mother had brown eyes and my father had blue eyes. Brown eyes are a
dominant trait over blue. Between 4 kids not one had brown eyes and 3 had
blue eyes. The 4th were green.
Many genes have varying degrees of "penetrance", i.e., they are not either
"off or on". Then, of course, many genes regulate the speed of
development of certain structures, so that a subtle alteration at the
critical phase can have profound effects on the end result. For example,
cleft lip & palate is caused by the facial structures not forming
completely during the first 8 weeks of life. Most cases of CL&P are not
due to any known genetic anomaly, but some are. When it comes to birth
defects like cleft lip, one of the problems is that most of the critical
structures have already formed before the woman even knows that she is
pregnant. That is why many women, of childbearing age, who are sexually
active, live as if they are pregnant (don't smoke, drink only moderately,
take vitamins, etc). If you wait for a missed period to "clean up your
act", it's already too late.
--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Llanzlan Klazmon" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 04:01:59 PM |
|
|
(Jon Skinner) wrote in news:1h630ux.6f7jgmmydga0N%
:
...I am one.
It's true. A couple of years back I had to get my kidneys x-rayed after
an accident. They pumped me full of some radioactive stuff and took
pictures of me insides. When the doctor was looking at the results he
said "That's a bit wierd..."
It turns out I have two tubes going from kidney to bladder, on both
sides, where there's only supposed to be one. The doctor wasn't all that
concerned about it, and said it's "just one of those glitches that turn
up in reproduction sometimes". Fairly common, apparently. Some people
get six toes; I got two tubes. Bully for me.
I didn't keep the x-rays, but wish I had so that I could wave them in
the face of any passing creationist who wants 'proof' of evolution.
Well... okay, it's not proof of evolution, but it's the sort of mutation
that is the raw material of evolution. I wish I could think of a
situation where it would give me a survival advantage though - then I'd
have an argument for the fundies. As it is, I can always ask "How come
God fucked up my innards? - Was he pissed or something?"
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation debate for
me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation to prove it!
Every person alive has muations that don't occur in the somatic cells of
either parent. The mutation (or it could be just a quirk of development)
resulting in the two tubes you speak of may or may not have any
significance as far as evolution goes. If it resulted from a somatic cell
mutation, then such a mutation is a non event as far as evolution goes,
because there is no way that it can be passed on to the next generation.
Only mutations in the germ cell line can get passed on and they are the
only ones that count as far as evolution is concerned.
Klazmon.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 04:17:53 PM |
|
|
Llanzlan Klazmon <Klazmon@llurdiaxorb.govt> wrote in alt.atheism
<snip>
Only mutations in the germ cell line can get passed on and they
are the only ones that count as far as evolution is concerned.
Is hair color in the germ cell line?
I have red hair, but neither of my parents have it, nor any of my four
grandparents had it.
Dunno if they're true or not, but I've heard stories of people
drowning red-headed babies because they were thought to be of the
devil. It'd be a survival disadvantage in that case, I think.
Some inherited mutation that was on the inside of the body wouldn't be
noticed by other people, so they couldn't single you out for
extinction..
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Llanzlan Klazmon" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 06:06:22 PM |
|
|
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in
news:p0nkn1ludi3ua2qpjq01sgcf3d8jd00q4f@4ax.com:
Llanzlan Klazmon <Klazmon@llurdiaxorb.govt> wrote in alt.atheism
<snip>
Only mutations in the germ cell line can get passed on and they
are the only ones that count as far as evolution is concerned.
Is hair color in the germ cell line?
All genes are in the germ cell line, however a mutation can arise in a
somatic cell of the developing zygote. Such a mutation can not be passed on
to the next generation. It is possible that such a somatic cell mutation
could affect hair colour. In your case it is more likely to be just a trait
that was not expressed in your parents or grandparents.
Klazmon.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 05:25:07 PM |
|
|
Llanzlan Klazmon wrote:
jskinner@senet.com.au (Jon Skinner) wrote in
news:1h630ux.6f7jgmmydga0N% jskinner@senet.com.au:
...I am one.
It's true. A couple of years back I had to get my kidneys x-rayed
after an accident. They pumped me full of some radioactive stuff
and took pictures of me insides. When the doctor was looking at the
results he said "That's a bit wierd..."
It turns out I have two tubes going from kidney to bladder, on both
sides, where there's only supposed to be one. The doctor wasn't all
that concerned about it, and said it's "just one of those glitches
that turn up in reproduction sometimes". Fairly common, apparently.
Some people get six toes; I got two tubes. Bully for me.
I didn't keep the x-rays, but wish I had so that I could wave them
in the face of any passing creationist who wants 'proof' of
evolution. Well... okay, it's not proof of evolution, but it's the
sort of mutation that is the raw material of evolution. I wish I
could think of a situation where it would give me a survival
advantage though - then I'd have an argument for the fundies. As it
is, I can always ask "How come God fucked up my innards? - Was he
pissed or something?"
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation
debate for me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation
to prove it!
Every person alive has muations that don't occur in the somatic
cells of either parent. The mutation (or it could be just a quirk of
development) resulting in the two tubes you speak of may or may not
have any significance as far as evolution goes. If it resulted from
a somatic cell mutation, then such a mutation is a non event as far
as evolution goes, because there is no way that it can be passed on
to the next generation. Only mutations in the germ cell line can get
passed on and they are the only ones that count as far as evolution
is concerned.
Klazmon.
It is quite common for such things to be found.
Not all people have their heart on the left side, not all
people have four aortas, some have three, some have five.
Not all people have the same numbers of ribs.
--
"If lightning is the anger of the gods, the
gods are concerned mostly with trees."
- Lao Tse
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
16 Nov 2005 01:36:50 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 17:25:07 -0600, in alt.atheism , wbarwell
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> in <11nkqitm1r9gf39@corp.supernews.com>
wrote:
[snip]
It is quite common for such things to be found.
Not all people have their heart on the left side, not all
people have four aortas, some have three, some have five.
Not all people have the same numbers of ribs.
And it is not at all clear to me that these are all genetic issues and
not developmental ones. Certainly some of them are developmental.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 05:49:26 PM |
|
|
wbarwell <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Llanzlan Klazmon wrote:
jskinner@senet.com.au (Jon Skinner) wrote in
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation
debate for me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation
to prove it!
Every person alive has muations that don't occur in the somatic
cells of either parent. The mutation (or it could be just a quirk of
development) resulting in the two tubes you speak of may or may not
have any significance as far as evolution goes. If it resulted from
a somatic cell mutation, then such a mutation is a non event as far
as evolution goes, because there is no way that it can be passed on
to the next generation. Only mutations in the germ cell line can get
passed on and they are the only ones that count as far as evolution
is concerned.
It is quite common for such things to be found.
Not all people have their heart on the left side, not all
people have four aortas, some have three, some have five.
Not all people have the same numbers of ribs.
Have you heard of "germ cell line" before? I consider myself pretty
knowledgeable about evolution, but hadn't heard of it before the above
post.
I don't like the sound of it, actually. Anything that's inheritable
is in some "germ cell line" ??
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Llanzlan Klazmon" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 06:56:24 PM |
|
|
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in
news:9nskn1pglilmsqjgv6q119209o4m4t56i5@4ax.com:
wbarwell <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Llanzlan Klazmon wrote:
jskinner@senet.com.au (Jon Skinner) wrote in
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation
debate for me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation
to prove it!
Every person alive has muations that don't occur in the somatic
cells of either parent. The mutation (or it could be just a quirk of
development) resulting in the two tubes you speak of may or may not
have any significance as far as evolution goes. If it resulted from
a somatic cell mutation, then such a mutation is a non event as far
as evolution goes, because there is no way that it can be passed on
to the next generation. Only mutations in the germ cell line can get
passed on and they are the only ones that count as far as evolution
is concerned.
It is quite common for such things to be found.
Not all people have their heart on the left side, not all
people have four aortas, some have three, some have five.
Not all people have the same numbers of ribs.
Have you heard of "germ cell line" before? I consider myself pretty
knowledgeable about evolution, but hadn't heard of it before the above
post.
I don't like the sound of it, actually. Anything that's inheritable
is in some "germ cell line" ??
The germ cell line means the line of cell's that produce gametes, i.e sperm
and egg cells. The somatic cells i.e our bodies are mere supporting
structures to successfully continue the germ cell line ;-). Or as someone
once said the zygote is the gametes way of producing more gametes.
Klazmon.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 06:54:37 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 23:49:26 GMT, in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in
<9nskn1pglilmsqjgv6q119209o4m4t56i5@4ax.com>:
wbarwell <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Llanzlan Klazmon wrote:
jskinner@senet.com.au (Jon Skinner) wrote in
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation
debate for me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation
to prove it!
Every person alive has muations that don't occur in the somatic
cells of either parent. The mutation (or it could be just a quirk of
development) resulting in the two tubes you speak of may or may not
have any significance as far as evolution goes. If it resulted from
a somatic cell mutation, then such a mutation is a non event as far
as evolution goes, because there is no way that it can be passed on
to the next generation. Only mutations in the germ cell line can get
passed on and they are the only ones that count as far as evolution
is concerned.
It is quite common for such things to be found.
Not all people have their heart on the left side, not all
people have four aortas, some have three, some have five.
Not all people have the same numbers of ribs.
Have you heard of "germ cell line" before? I consider myself pretty
knowledgeable about evolution, but hadn't heard of it before the above
post.
I don't like the sound of it, actually. Anything that's inheritable
is in some "germ cell line" ??
Apparently life is a disease you catch.
Yeah, sperm and eggs are germ cells, cf 'germination'.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
16 Nov 2005 07:53:11 AM |
|
|
David Jensen <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Yeah, sperm and eggs are germ cells, cf 'germination'.
Ah, I get it.
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
16 Nov 2005 01:35:49 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 23:49:26 GMT, in alt.atheism , Elroy Willis
<elroywillis@swbell.net> in
<9nskn1pglilmsqjgv6q119209o4m4t56i5@4ax.com> wrote:
wbarwell <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Llanzlan Klazmon wrote:
jskinner@senet.com.au (Jon Skinner) wrote in
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation
debate for me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation
to prove it!
Every person alive has muations that don't occur in the somatic
cells of either parent. The mutation (or it could be just a quirk of
development) resulting in the two tubes you speak of may or may not
have any significance as far as evolution goes. If it resulted from
a somatic cell mutation, then such a mutation is a non event as far
as evolution goes, because there is no way that it can be passed on
to the next generation. Only mutations in the germ cell line can get
passed on and they are the only ones that count as far as evolution
is concerned.
It is quite common for such things to be found.
Not all people have their heart on the left side, not all
people have four aortas, some have three, some have five.
Not all people have the same numbers of ribs.
Have you heard of "germ cell line" before? I consider myself pretty
knowledgeable about evolution, but hadn't heard of it before the above
post.
I don't like the sound of it, actually. Anything that's inheritable
is in some "germ cell line" ??
Yep. It is part of the Central Dogma of Biology.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 09:39:24 AM |
|
|
In <1h630ux.6f7jgmmydga0N%>,
(Jon Skinner) wrote:
...I am one.
It's true. A couple of years back I had to get my kidneys x-rayed after an
accident. They pumped me full of some radioactive stuff and took pictures
of me insides. When the doctor was looking at the results he said "That's
a bit wierd..."
It turns out I have two tubes going from kidney to bladder, on both sides,
where there's only supposed to be one. The doctor wasn't all that
concerned about it, and said it's "just one of those glitches that turn up
in reproduction sometimes". Fairly common, apparently. Some people get six
toes; I got two tubes. Bully for me.
I didn't keep the x-rays, but wish I had so that I could wave them in the
face of any passing creationist who wants 'proof' of evolution. Well...
okay, it's not proof of evolution, but it's the sort of mutation that is
the raw material of evolution. I wish I could think of a situation where
it would give me a survival advantage though - then I'd have an argument
for the fundies. As it is, I can always ask "How come God fucked up my
innards? - Was he pissed or something?"
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation debate for
me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation to prove it!
Well, since cretinists insist mutations are harmful, obviously you're dead
and can't post so nobody saw this...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
Forgotten Already
http://makeashorterlink.com/?H1233272C
Feds are treating Louisiana like enemy
"...it may be that they may have written us off."
http://makeashorterlink.com/?O21E51C1C
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "BDK" |
|
| Title: Re: Speaking of mutations... |
15 Nov 2005 12:26:28 PM |
|
|
In article <1h630ux.6f7jgmmydga0N%jskinner@senet.com.au>,
jskinner@senet.com.au says...
...I am one.
It's true. A couple of years back I had to get my kidneys x-rayed after
an accident. They pumped me full of some radioactive stuff and took
pictures of me insides. When the doctor was looking at the results he
said "That's a bit wierd..."
It turns out I have two tubes going from kidney to bladder, on both
sides, where there's only supposed to be one. The doctor wasn't all that
concerned about it, and said it's "just one of those glitches that turn
up in reproduction sometimes". Fairly common, apparently. Some people
get six toes; I got two tubes. Bully for me.
I didn't keep the x-rays, but wish I had so that I could wave them in
the face of any passing creationist who wants 'proof' of evolution.
Well... okay, it's not proof of evolution, but it's the sort of mutation
that is the raw material of evolution. I wish I could think of a
situation where it would give me a survival advantage though - then I'd
have an argument for the fundies. As it is, I can always ask "How come
God fucked up my innards? - Was he pissed or something?"
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation debate for
me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation to prove it!
My Ex-girlfriends innards were "reversed". All the organs were on
opposite sides, they found it out when she got pneumonia and they took a
chest xray. Hasn't seemed to have caused any problems over her 44+
years.
Two tubes might be useful if you got a really bad infection and one of
them corked up. Other than that, it's not much help.
BDK
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: 30% of humans are mutants (Was: Speaking of mutations...) |
15 Nov 2005 03:02:48 PM |
|
|
Jon Skinner wrote:
...I am one.
It's true. A couple of years back I had to get my kidneys x-rayed after
an accident. They pumped me full of some radioactive stuff and took
pictures of me insides. When the doctor was looking at the results he
said "That's a bit wierd..."
It turns out I have two tubes going from kidney to bladder, on both
sides, where there's only supposed to be one. The doctor wasn't all that
concerned about it, and said it's "just one of those glitches that turn
up in reproduction sometimes". Fairly common, apparently. Some people
get six toes; I got two tubes. Bully for me.
I didn't keep the x-rays, but wish I had so that I could wave them in
the face of any passing creationist who wants 'proof' of evolution.
Well... okay, it's not proof of evolution, but it's the sort of mutation
that is the raw material of evolution. I wish I could think of a
situation where it would give me a survival advantage though - then I'd
have an argument for the fundies. As it is, I can always ask "How come
God fucked up my innards? - Was he pissed or something?"
In a funny kind of way it personalises the evolution/creation debate for
me. I'm an evolved life form, and I've got the mutation to prove it!
I've recently found out I am lactose intolerant. Which, oddly enough, puts
me in the majority as some 70% of all adult humans can not digest milk
sugar. Humans are the only mammals known to have this mutation: all others,
including our nearest primate relatives, lose the ability to produce lactase
(the enzyme that digests the milk sugar lactose) about the same time they
are weaned, probably as an evolutionary advantage to force the child off of
mother's milk and free the mother to reproduce again.
Genetic evidence points to there being three different places where this
mutation arose. Once in Sweden, where it spread through most of Europe; once
in Arabia, where it spread in to southern Europe through the Middle East and
in to India; and most recently in eastern Africa, where it is still largely
confined to the Masai. All other humans on the planet become lactose
intolerant to some degree after about the age of 3, with the severity of
symptoms becoming stronger with age.
So for all of you adults who put cream in your coffee, milk on your cereal
or wash down your burger with a thick shake.... YOU ARE MUTANT FREAKS OF
NATURE!
<g>
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"[W]e have never held that moral disapproval, without any other asserted
state interest, is a sufficient rationale under the Equal Protection
Clause to justify a law that discriminates among groups of persons."
- Sandra Day O`Conner, _Lawrence v Texas_
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=02-102
.
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|