Mass Effect 2 Tropes A-F Discussion

collapse/expand topics

06:57:53 AM Jun 23rd 2011
edited by Fighteer
  • Did Not Do The Research The thing about humans having a high genetic diversity? We actually don't. Our genetic similarity implies that humanity is a near-extinction species that rebounded from five or ten thousand individuals, because our DNA resemblance to each other is only found in rebound species. Basically, the baby squirrels in the nest out in your yard will have less DNA in common than you and a random person from Brazil. So if humanity has more genetic diversity than any other sapient species, the others are just about terminally inbred.
    • "Terminally inbred" is entirely probable. They've had much longer to conform their offspring to desired genotypes. Humans are busily doing the same, via amniocentesis to remove the Huntingdon's chorea markers for example, and Miranda is one example - not only was she her Dad's genetic ideal, he made two of her.
    • Comparisons of generational times and genetic isolation assumes that the other species mutate at similar rates as humans. Asari do not appear to share genetic information upon breeding given their capacity to breed with anything, mating appears to trigger genetic recombination, but not mixing. Salarians only allow a small fraction of their young to be female to control growth rates, but also bottleneck genetic diversity as not all prospective males appear to be allowed to mate (even moreso than the realities of human courtship). More to the point, current research is pointing to the realization that mere genes don't begin to cover the layers of complexity that exist, epigenetics being just one step, with several more outlandish, but intriguing possibilities being posited. (straight from the exact same complaint on the ME Series page.)
    • And Krogan females are few in number (Weyrloc clan leader was thought to have a destiny because he had two children and "one of them's a girl").
    • The usual comparison in the scientific literature is with chimpanzees, not squirrels. All such comparisons suffer from the same problem: the genes we can identify can't be the whole story. Human epigenetics is around twenty times more important than the 50 actual genes which are known to have an effect on height (BBC news report honouring Galton on 16th June 2011: "... we have only 20,000 genes altogether... We know of more than 50 different genes associated with height ... altogether they account for only one-twentieth of the total variation needed to explain the similarity of children to their parents. Where are the missing genes? We do not know. ").

Okay, this is completely off topic for this page. At the point when you're discussing obscure theories of genetic variance, you are no longer in DNDTR territory; you're in freakishly pedantic nitpicking territory. And all of it is Natter.
07:06:38 AM Jun 23rd 2011
Agree, we can just cull it.