Gamingforce Interactive Forums
85239 35211

Go Back   Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis > Garrmondo Network > Political Palace

Notices

Welcome to the Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis.
GFF is a community of gaming and music enthusiasts. We have a team of dedicated moderators, constant member-organized activities, and plenty of custom features, including our unique journal system. If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ or our GFWiki. You will have to register before you can post. Membership is completely free (and gets rid of the pesky advertisement unit underneath this message).


Should we interbreed with our family members?
Reply
 
Thread Tools
AndyClaw
Larry Oji, Super Moderator, Judge, "Dirge for the Follin" Project Director, VG Frequency Creator


Member 7363

Level 2.12

May 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:10 AM #1 of 63
Should we interbreed with our family members?

In case you had no idea why, the reason we are not supposed to "marry our cousins" is because of genetic mutations which would be passed down upon our children. If everyone in my family has a genetic mutation, this mutation will not be apparent in my children, because when you get married, your husband's or wife's genes make sure that no mutation is passed down. For example, if "ABCDEFG" is normal, and my family has the mutated "ABCDEFF" and my wife's family has the mutated "AACDEFG" then our child will still be perfectly normal, and have "ABCDEFG" because the correct genes over-ride the incorrect ones. If I married my sister, we both have "ABCDEFF" and our child would have the mutated genes.

I am getting into a question about genetic mutation that I have, and I just want this one question answered. To have mutation-selection theory work, you need to have mutations. If you have no mutations, then you will never have anything to select, and no evolutionary progress can be made for a species. If evolution is a good thing that makes species progress forward, then...

Would interbreeding with our family members speed up the evolutionary process?

How can random genetic mutations last more than one generation and make an impact on the evolution of a species when the two-gene system fixes all mutations?

How can evolution bypass the overwhelming bad side affects of genetic mutations and cause a random mutation to benefit a species?

So the scientific question presented is, "Should I marry my cousin to further the human race?"

I am seeking a scientific answer to these questions because I have never seen the evolutionist's viewpoint on this topic. Please do not get off the topic of genetic mutation.

You do not need to know what I think in order to answer my question, but I thought I would give my own belief on the history of genetic mutation.

In general, I agree that mutation-selection theory or "evolution" is a completely VALID scientific model for the evolution of species, but I would scientifically disagree that the mutation-selection model can REALISTICALLY produce or evolve species, and I believe that mutations are much more responsible for the DE-evolution of the species of the world.

I also believe that these scientific beliefs of mine line up with my faith that the human species was created perfect. This means that shortly after the perfect creation, marrying within the family was perfectly healthy. This is how Adam and Eve's sons and daughters could have made a family with each other. Anyway, I believe that today, the human race has accumulated many many harmful mutations since the day of perfect creation, and this is why today we cannot marry within the family without expecting horrible consequences.

Jam it back in, in the dark.
Alice
For Great Justice!


Member 600

Level 38.35

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:18 AM #2 of 63
I know everyone is just waiting for me to respond to this thread, so I'm going to.

Inbreeding is something that has been practiced in pretty much every culture in every time period. Royal families still do it in order to keep their bloodlines pure.

Marrying a distant cousin is not going to give you two-headed, green children. It's when people start marrying their siblings, first cousins, aunts and uncles that problems start to arise.

There's nowhere I can't reach.
Fjordor
Holy Chocobo


Member 97

Level 32.96

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:25 AM Local time: May 24, 2006, 11:25 AM #3 of 63
In the grand overview of evolutionary theory, inbreeding will not accelerate human evolution, and if anything could detriment it.
Evolution requires that only mutations which allow the organism to better perform in its environment will be passed on. However, these beneficial mutations must be passed on to a larger population for them to have any significance.

If, for example, there are 2 mutations which are in 2 different families, which when combined are beneficial, but when kept isolated is detrimental, then it would be disastrous.

My final thoughts on this are that the question is too lacking in details and full of assumed value judgements which scientists cannot address, making it difficult to reply. I am not even sure if the previous paragraphs I wrote even addressed the question well enough.
I think that your question is also operating with the assumption that genetic traits are easily determined by just pairs of genes, which is folly. Example:
Quote:
How can random genetic mutations last more than one generation and make an impact on the evolution of a species when the two-gene system fixes all mutations?
Huh?

EDIT:
Addressing another of your questions:
Quote:
How can evolution bypass the overwhelming bad side affects of genetic mutations and cause a random mutation to benefit a species?
It does because it does. Bad mutations are killed off, and good mutations live. You seem to be assuming that most mutations are detrimental.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Last edited by Fjordor; May 24, 2006 at 10:31 AM.
AndyClaw
Larry Oji, Super Moderator, Judge, "Dirge for the Follin" Project Director, VG Frequency Creator


Member 7363

Level 2.12

May 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:34 AM #4 of 63
Just a tidbit from history about royal families, there are a lot of horror stories about the bad side affects of the royal families maintaining their blood line, and some think that this spawned some mythology (aka Minotaurs) LOLOL that last part is just a speculation that I heard of once.

Double Post:
Good point. I am assuming that most mutations are detrimental. Isn't this well known fact?

Double Post:
Okay, I learned that we have two of every one of our genes, so having two parents makes sure that the bad genes don't cause any problems.

I am also assuming that this two-gene system eliminates the bad genes. In retrosepct I think that is incorrect. Yey? Ney?

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Last edited by AndyClaw; May 24, 2006 at 10:39 AM. Reason: Automerged additional post.
Fjordor
Holy Chocobo


Member 97

Level 32.96

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:40 AM Local time: May 24, 2006, 11:40 AM #5 of 63
Originally Posted by AndyClaw
Good point. I am assuming that most mutations are detrimental. Isn't this well known fact?
No. That is an assumption. We don't really know if a mutation is good or bad. Of course, this is again making a value judgement about something which should be looked at through the lens of objectivity.

I was speaking idiomatically.
AndyClaw
Larry Oji, Super Moderator, Judge, "Dirge for the Follin" Project Director, VG Frequency Creator


Member 7363

Level 2.12

May 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:42 AM #6 of 63
No, seriously, disregarding all values, I can say that most genetic mutations are harmful. I mean, isn't this obvious when you think about all the tragically deformed children who are born?

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?
Magi
Big Trouble


Member 541

Level 26.51

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:45 AM Local time: May 24, 2006, 08:45 AM #7 of 63
You know, we are not exactly DNA clone of our parents. Mutation doesn't have to have a detrimental or beneficial effects.

FELIPE NO
I poked it and it made a sad sound
Struttin'


Member 24

Level 51.86

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:45 AM #8 of 63
I see absolutely no reason why a person should interbreed with one of their own kin. It's kind of unnatural anyways.

You're NOT SUPPOSED to stay within your own family's genetic pool. Look what happens.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?
Rock
Rock me


Member 66

Level 29.37

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:47 AM Local time: May 24, 2006, 05:47 PM #9 of 63
Originally Posted by AliceNWondrland
Royal families still do it in order to keep their bloodlines pure.
I'm not aware of any royal families that still do this today. In fact, even the historical cases of inbreeding in European monarchies can be traced down to a handful of instances and they're all documented.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Last edited by Rock; May 24, 2006 at 10:54 AM.
Alice
For Great Justice!


Member 600

Level 38.35

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:47 AM #10 of 63
What happens exactly? It's a fairly common practice here in the South. Not as common as people think, but it does happen. Maybe not all mutations are easily detectible or visible, but I know plenty of people who have married distant relatives with (seemingly) no ill effects.

Double Post:
Originally Posted by Rock
I'm not aware of any royal families that still do this today. In fact, even the historical cases of interbreeding in European monarchies can be traced down to a handful of instances and they're all documented.
Princess Diana and Prince Charles were cousins.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Last edited by Alice; May 24, 2006 at 10:48 AM. Reason: Automerged additional post.
Fjordor
Holy Chocobo


Member 97

Level 32.96

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:48 AM Local time: May 24, 2006, 11:48 AM #11 of 63
Originally Posted by AndyClaw
No, seriously, disregarding all values, I can say that most genetic mutations are harmful. I mean, isn't this obvious when you think about all the tragically deformed children who are born?
Have YOU seen all the tragically deformed children?

You would have to know of every instance of a mutation throughout human hisatory to be able to say that most are detrimental. As of now, I find it highly improbable that you contain such knowledge.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.
AndyClaw
Larry Oji, Super Moderator, Judge, "Dirge for the Follin" Project Director, VG Frequency Creator


Member 7363

Level 2.12

May 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:52 AM #12 of 63
Magi, so are you saying that we are not quite EXACTLY the same species as our parents?

IF your answer is yes, than a question for you Magi is if these slight mutations go away when we find another human to have a child with. I am wondering about that.

If you are talking about variation within the species, like hair color, then that is irrelevent to evolution completely (just making sure we are on the same page, you probably already know that).

Most amazing jew boots
Fjordor
Holy Chocobo


Member 97

Level 32.96

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:56 AM Local time: May 24, 2006, 11:56 AM #13 of 63
Originally Posted by AndyClaw
Magi, so are you saying that we are not quite EXACTLY the same species as our parents?

IF your answer is yes, than a question for you Magi is if these slight mutations go away when we find another human to have a child with. I am wondering about that.

If you are talking about variation within the species, like hair color, then that is irrelevent to evolution completely (just making sure we are on the same page, you probably already know that).
I would just like to say: from a genetic standpoint, the term "species" is almost as ambiguous(but not quite) as the term "race."

I was speaking idiomatically.
AndyClaw
Larry Oji, Super Moderator, Judge, "Dirge for the Follin" Project Director, VG Frequency Creator


Member 7363

Level 2.12

May 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:58 AM #14 of 63
I am not talking about cousins specifically, really, because the farther away from your direct family members you go, the less chance of a mutation you have.

In fact, you COULD in theory marry your sister and have normal children.

I am talking about when the mutation DOES happen.

Okay, to answer you question about the bad side affects. Think of it this way, because it is supposed to be obvious. I am not trying to possess some supreme knowledge, because this should be a common fact of nature. If I marry my sister, and have a baby, which means there is a VERY HIGH chance to pass on a genetic mutation, is my baby more likely to have a super high IQ or to be mentally retarded?

There is definitely data existing to answer that question, and this is what I am talking about. Why do you think the word "MUTATE" has such a bad connotation?

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?
Magi
Big Trouble


Member 541

Level 26.51

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 10:58 AM Local time: May 24, 2006, 08:58 AM #15 of 63
Originally Posted by AndyClaw
Magi, so are you saying that we are not quite EXACTLY the same species as our parents?
That's a resonable deduction, I guess.
Quote:
IF your answer is yes, than a question for you Magi is if these slight mutations go away when we find another human to have a child with. I am wondering about that.
The problem is, they don't go away. Although you do have to remember, that another half of the child's DNA come from your partner.

How ya doing, buddy?
AndyClaw
Larry Oji, Super Moderator, Judge, "Dirge for the Follin" Project Director, VG Frequency Creator


Member 7363

Level 2.12

May 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 11:01 AM #16 of 63
Well, for the sake of the topic, try not to confuse the term species and make that an issue. Lets just say that if a genetic mutation occurs, then you are no longer the same species. Lets just pretend that this is the defenition for now, because it works for me. Uhhh..... ok? LOL.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?
Fjordor
Holy Chocobo


Member 97

Level 32.96

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 11:02 AM Local time: May 24, 2006, 12:02 PM #17 of 63
Originally Posted by AndyClaw
Okay, to answer you question about the bad side affects. Think of it this way, because it is supposed to be obvious. I am not trying to possess some supreme knowledge, because this should be a common fact of nature. If I marry my sister, and have a baby, which means there is a VERY HIGH chance to pass on a genetic mutation, is my baby more likely to have a super high IQ or to be mentally retarded?

There is definitely data existing to answer that question, and this is what I am talking about. Why do you think the word "MUTATE" has such a bad connotation?
It depends upon the nature of the mutation, the origin of the mutation, the importance of the mutation, the environment in which the organism is living in, ad nauseum.
You are being too caught up in statistics and sweeping generalizations. An honest scientist will look at the particulars and the details as much as they can.

Mutate has a bad connotation because that is what the media did to it.

Jam it back in, in the dark.
AndyClaw
Larry Oji, Super Moderator, Judge, "Dirge for the Follin" Project Director, VG Frequency Creator


Member 7363

Level 2.12

May 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 11:04 AM #18 of 63
So here are my three questions, one of which has been answered.

Would interbreeding with our family members speed up the evolutionary process?

(How can random genetic mutations last more than one generation and make an impact on the evolution of a species when the two-gene system fixes all mutations?) Answered: the two-gene system does not make mutations go away, so the mutations are not fixed.

How can evolution bypass the overwhelming bad side affects of genetic mutations and cause a random mutation to benefit a species?

There's nowhere I can't reach.
Fjordor
Holy Chocobo


Member 97

Level 32.96

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 11:06 AM Local time: May 24, 2006, 12:06 PM #19 of 63
Originally Posted by AndyClaw
Would interbreeding with our family members speed up the evolutionary process?
This WAS answered. I said that it would not.

Quote:
How can evolution bypass the overwhelming bad side affects of genetic mutations and cause a random mutation to benefit a species?
Because the mutations that are detrimental are killed off.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Last edited by Fjordor; May 24, 2006 at 11:09 AM.
I poked it and it made a sad sound
Struttin'


Member 24

Level 51.86

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 11:10 AM #20 of 63
Originally Posted by Fjordor
This WAS answered. I said that it would not.
If anything, it would slow it down and muck up the gears.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?
Magi
Big Trouble


Member 541

Level 26.51

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 11:10 AM Local time: May 24, 2006, 09:10 AM #21 of 63
Originally Posted by AndyClaw
How can evolution bypass the overwhelming bad side affects of genetic mutations and cause a random mutation to benefit a species?
Originally Posted by Fjordor
Because the mutations are detrimental are killed off.
To put things in perspective, you only need to keep in mind that majority of known species that existed in the ancient world are already extinct.

I was speaking idiomatically.
AndyClaw
Larry Oji, Super Moderator, Judge, "Dirge for the Follin" Project Director, VG Frequency Creator


Member 7363

Level 2.12

May 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 11:11 AM #22 of 63
Okay, well here is what I say about your viewpoint of mutation. A mutation is a mutation is a mutation. They come from ALL KINDS of sources, but they all produce the same thing: a random effect. Your theory about mutation (we need to factor in "ad nauseum" conditions to see what the true result would be) sounds good, but I am not talking about IN REAL LIFE, not in theory, but in practice. You can take any species, subject it to high amounts of mutation, and collect the data. The data will produce mostly negative results.

About "the media". I could just as logically state that misguided scientists around the world who are fostering a psuedo-scientific lie have painted a good connotative picture of mutations which has warped your viewpoint of the true original connotations of the word. I won't say that though, as it is irrelevent. Oops, I said it anyway. Disregard that.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?
Fjordor
Holy Chocobo


Member 97

Level 32.96

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 11:15 AM Local time: May 24, 2006, 12:15 PM #23 of 63
Originally Posted by AndyClaw
Okay, well here is what I say about your viewpoint of mutation. A mutation is a mutation is a mutation. They come from ALL KINDS of sources, but they all produce the same thing: a random effect. Your theory about mutation (we need to factor in "ad nauseum" conditions to see what the true result would be) sounds good, but I am not talking about IN REAL LIFE, not in theory, but in practice. You can take any species, subject it to high amounts of mutation, and collect the data. The data will produce mostly negative results.

About "the media". I could just as logically state that misguided scientists around the world who are fostering a psuedo-scientific lie have painted a good connotative picture of mutations which has warped your viewpoint of the true original connotations of the word. I won't say that though, as it is irrelevent. Oops, I said it anyway. Disregard that.
And I AM talking about in practice.
In real life, the ratio of mutations to generations is significantly lower than you would propose for your experiment.

BTW, I am deliberately taking a view opposing yours because I don't think you are looking at this matter in the right way to really benefit yourself or your attempts at apologetics, if you will.

FELIPE NO
AndyClaw
Larry Oji, Super Moderator, Judge, "Dirge for the Follin" Project Director, VG Frequency Creator


Member 7363

Level 2.12

May 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 11:16 AM #24 of 63
About the need to subject the mutations to a larger population group so that the mutations can work together. I get what you are saying, but a question... can these independently useless mutations wait for something to make them useful, or do they go away?

Double Post:
Oh, and by the way, this is mostly a learning experience for me, not really making any points on my end except to clear road blocks. I already know what I THINK the answers to my questions are, that is why I am not answering them but asking them hehe.

Double Post:
GAHH I need to go to sleep. Now. No more chatter. I need sleep so I can go to work tonight. Reply all you want I might check in later.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Last edited by AndyClaw; May 24, 2006 at 11:19 AM. Reason: Automerged additional post.
Fjordor
Holy Chocobo


Member 97

Level 32.96

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2006, 11:19 AM Local time: May 24, 2006, 12:19 PM #25 of 63
Originally Posted by AndyClaw
About the need to subject the mutations to a larger population group so that the mutations can work together. I get what you are saying, but a question... can these independently useless mutations wait for something to make them useful, or do they go away?
If you already assume that a mutation gets passed on from the originator to further generations: they will remain "useless" until they either benefit or detriment the organisms. In which case they will either remain within the gene pool, or they will will be killed.

Jam it back in, in the dark.
Reply

Thread Tools

Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis > Garrmondo Network > Political Palace > Should we interbreed with our family members?

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.