Post by haplotype on Aug 12, 2009 10:19:44 GMT -5
From extrapolating the homologies observed in anatomical structure and DNA, scientists have connected the dots to infer that they are related by heritage. Who is to say that all primates are related to one another, though? Could one or more species be a branch from another order, based on convergent evolution? In earlier times, if species had fewer differences in DNA, what could have prevented any number of crosses between tree-climbing animals, who were not necessarily "primates"? Besides interbreeding, viruses and sometimes bacteria are known to transfer genes between hosts. Could there be extinct strains of microbes that aggressively transferred genes between species? It could be that some non-primate genes got transferred to some primates and not others. I'm willing to put money that future scientists will discover some genes that got transferred across orders, classes, phylums, maybe even kingdoms. Scientists do acknowledge that 90% or more of our DNA, which is "junk", come from viruses. The "junk DNA", which is increasingly acknowledged as having functional purposes after all, is the same as the dark matter problem that plagues physics; our physics explains only the 10% of the universe that we do understand. From this perspective, is it not logical to say that humans are 90% descended from viruses and 10% from primates?
Why is it that humans are cosmopolitan, when the rest of the primates are restricted to tropical forests? Strictly in terms of habitat, humans more closely resemble bears than apes; they live everywhere, often in caves, and chase ground prey. Could there have been gene transfers between humans and non-primates, once humans started living away from other primates? For example, it could be that humans are 85% descended from viruses, 8% from other primates, 4% from other animals, 2% from protozoans, 1% from fungi.
Some primates, such as the mouse lemur, have devolved into forms that make them differ little from raccoons in appearance and behavior. How many ingrown branches does our tree of evolution contain, by which species merged back together? Maybe the DNA similarities observed among modern specimens are deceptive, artifacts of ingrown branches.
Why is it that humans are cosmopolitan, when the rest of the primates are restricted to tropical forests? Strictly in terms of habitat, humans more closely resemble bears than apes; they live everywhere, often in caves, and chase ground prey. Could there have been gene transfers between humans and non-primates, once humans started living away from other primates? For example, it could be that humans are 85% descended from viruses, 8% from other primates, 4% from other animals, 2% from protozoans, 1% from fungi.
Some primates, such as the mouse lemur, have devolved into forms that make them differ little from raccoons in appearance and behavior. How many ingrown branches does our tree of evolution contain, by which species merged back together? Maybe the DNA similarities observed among modern specimens are deceptive, artifacts of ingrown branches.