• Re: Convergent Evolution Has Been Fooling Us: Humans didn't come from n

    From Jim Gannet@21:1/5 to AOC eats shit on Mon Jun 6 06:55:15 2022
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.republicans, alt.society.liberalism XPost: talk.politics.guns

    In article <rpa2n6$pk6$7@neodome.net>
    AOC eats shit <commies@gmx.com> wrote:

    ...I spent all my money at the sex shoppe.

    An evolutionary tree, or phylogenetic tree, is a branching
    diagram showing the evolutionary relationships among various
    biological species based upon similarities and differences in
    their characteristics. Historically, this was done using their
    physical characteristics — the similarities and differences in
    various species’ anatomies.

    However, advances in genetic technology now enable biologists to
    use genetic data to decipher evolutionary relationships.
    According to a new study, scientists are finding that the
    molecular data is leading to much different results, sometimes
    overturning centuries of scientific work in classifying species
    by physical traits.

    New research led by scientists at the Milner Center for
    Evolution at the University of Bath suggests that determining
    evolutionary trees of organisms by comparing anatomy rather than
    gene sequences is misleading. The study, published in the
    journal Communications Biology on May 31, 2022, shows that we
    often need to overturn centuries of scholarly work that
    classified living things according to how they look.

    Since Darwin and his contemporaries in the 19th Century,
    biologists have been trying to reconstruct the “family trees” of
    animals by carefully examining differences in their anatomy and
    structure (morphology).

    However, with the development of rapid genetic sequencing
    techniques, biologists are now able to use genetic (molecular)
    data to help piece together evolutionary relationships for
    species very quickly and cheaply, often proving that organisms
    we once thought were closely related actually belong in
    completely different branches of the tree.

    For the first time, scientists at Bath compared evolutionary
    trees based on morphology with those based on molecular data,
    and mapped them according to geographical location.

    They found that the animals grouped together by molecular trees
    lived more closely together geographically than the animals
    grouped using the morphological trees.

    Matthew Wills, Professor of Evolutionary Paleobiology at the
    Milner Center for Evolution at the University of Bath, said: “It
    turns out that we’ve got lots of our evolutionary trees wrong.

    “For over a hundred years, we’ve been classifying organisms
    according to how they look and are put together anatomically,
    but molecular data often tells us a rather different story.

    “Our study proves statistically that if you build an
    evolutionary tree of animals based on their molecular data, it
    often fits much better with their geographical distribution.

    “Where things live – their biogeography – is an important source
    of evolutionary evidence that was familiar to Darwin and his
    contemporaries.

    “For example, tiny elephant shrews, aardvarks, elephants, golden
    moles, and swimming manatees have all come from the same big
    branch of mammal evolution — despite the fact that they look
    completely different from one another (and live in very
    different ways).

    “Molecular trees have put them all together in a group called
    Afrotheria, so-called because they all come from the African
    continent, so the group matches the biogeography.”

    The study found that convergent evolution – when a
    characteristic evolves separately in two genetically unrelated
    groups of organisms – is much more common than biologists
    previously thought.

    Professor Wills said: “We already have lots of famous examples
    of convergent evolution, such as flight evolving separately in
    birds, bats, and insects, or complex camera eyes evolving
    separately in squid and humans.

    “But now with molecular data, we can see that convergent
    evolution happens all the time – things we thought were closely
    related often turn out to be far apart on the tree of life.

    So humans really didn't evolve from niggers like liberals claim.

    https://scitechdaily.com/convergent-evolution-has-been-fooling- us-most-of-our-evolutionary-trees-could-be-wrong/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)