I wonder what would happen if...

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by SOPi_Jawbreaker

A 2% difference in DNA may not sound like a lot but it is. I think there is a large amount of shared DNA across many different Eukaryotes, because a large number of our genes are just coding for the basics that we share (e.g. mitochondria, endoplasmic reticulum, Golgi apparatus, nucleus, ribosomes, cell membrane, centrioles, lysozymes, proteins, enzymes, ion channels, metabolic pathways, chemical pathways, replication, transcription, translation, cytokinesis, etc). We share about half our DNA with bananas and cabbages. That sounds like a lot of shared DNA, yet we look nothing like bananas or cabbages. If a 50% is that significant to produce such a difference between humans and fruits/vegetables, then think about how big a difference a 2% is still going to make.

Yes, this is true, but this is why I asked the tour guide lady about the small changes in regions of the DNA that have a customary or regular function in the appearance of the organism. That's why I also asked her if it could be a different developmental trajectory between chimps and humans. I mentioned that in an earlier post too.

[PeppyGPhiB]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Yes, this is true, but this is why I asked the tour guide lady about the small changes in regions of the DNA that have a customary or regular function in the appearance of the organism. That's why I also asked her if it could be a different developmental trajectory between chimps and humans. I mentioned that in an earlier post too.

Enough already.

[nate2512]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Yes, this is true, but this is why I asked the tour guide lady about the small changes in regions of the DNA that have a customary or regular function in the appearance of the organism. That's why I also asked her if it could be a different developmental trajectory between chimps and humans. I mentioned that in an earlier post too.

Why don't you go give the damn tours then since you know so effin much, give me a break, you've clearly proved to everyone here and at the zoo that you're a pompous asshole who tries to make yourself look better and smarter than every one else. If you are really that interested in it, go to school and learn about it and study it yourself, otherwise get off your damn soap box, stop watching national geographic, and shut the hell up. If the lady knew that much about animals do you really think she'd be working as a tour guide at a zoo? Most of them are trained to know where the animals reside in habitats, what they eat, general knowledge of the animals, not stuff you were asking about.

Thank you, rant finished.