Hmmm, what genetic evidence though? Any sources here?
I don't believe genes are what they're made up to be.
Discussion
skeptical good
but this is based upon the genetics identified in various aged bones over the last 200k years, and that's what the current estimate is
the evidence of the event that did it is also questionable, if you are proper scientist you question everything, might be wrong, maybe that event was less bad than we thought but the people were just unlucky for no reason at all, just bad luck
idk if you read much Taleb and i hate this bastid nowadays but Fooled by Chance is a study in how we attribute causality where there is nothing but chaos
i'm not that big a fan of the stupid maxim that "what can be attributed to malice is more likely to be caused by stupidity" (because malice loves to induce stupidity) but finding pictures in the noise is another flaw in cognition that can cloud understanding as well, so, you have to actually study it to have a firm opinion
mine is very nebulous, but i like the way it fits with the rest of the data i have absorbed
Agreed and yes I read that book ✅.
My point is that I don't think DNA is much more than a determinant of what proteins can get made. It dues not contain information on morphology etc etc... AND it can morph into entirely different DNA in certain conditions. Inheritance is mostly resonance (morphic fields, ...).
So that's why I'm weary of calculations that use genes as some kind of proof for things like family trees, especially in time periods with violent changes in magnetic + other fields 😅
ah, well, the question of morphology is a good one... one change in the DNA you get 6 fingers or double the height
the morphology stuff is telegraphic and environmentally controlled i think, telegraphic as in, seemingly unrelated small changes in several areas can cause a radically different morphology
part of morphology even comes from how the growth accumulates, the "scaling" part of the process of growth
Curious what you believe about genetics here?
First book that made questions the mainstream genetic view was Morphic Resinance, by Rupert Sheldrake.
Inheritance through genes is a storyline where the math and many other things don't work out.
Thousand of fun examples like two headed plenarain worms inheriting the two heads (that humans created by changing the magnetic field around the worms) without any change in their DNA base pairs.
That does open up a lot of possibility.
Sounds wild 🔥 Putting it on my reading list
Curiosity continuum, here goes another 🐇 🕳️ 😂
In "Morphic Resonance," Rupert Sheldrake delves into a series of provocative questions that challenge conventional scientific understanding and encourage readers to think beyond established paradigms. Here are some of the most intriguing questions raised by Sheldrake, along with a deeper exploration of their implications:
1. **What is the nature of memory in biological systems?**
- **Sheldrake’s Perspective:** Sheldrake proposes that memory is not stored solely in the brain or genetic material but is embedded in morphic fields that transcend individual organisms. This idea suggests that memories can be accessed non-locally and are shared across species and generations.
- **Implications:** This challenges the traditional understanding of memory as a biochemical process confined to the brain. If true, it could revolutionize fields such as neuroscience, psychology, and evolutionary biology, suggesting that behaviors and habits can be inherited through means other than DNA.
2. **How do organisms develop their forms and behaviors?**
- **Sheldrake’s Perspective:** According to Sheldrake, the development of forms and behaviors in organisms is guided by morphic fields, which are shaped by the cumulative experiences of past organisms. This means that the growth patterns and behaviors of an organism are influenced by a collective memory.
- **Implications:** This question calls into question the exclusive role of genetic information in development and opens the possibility that learning and adaptation can occur much more rapidly than previously thought. It suggests a mechanism for how complex structures and behaviors can emerge without a direct genetic blueprint.
3. **Can the concept of morphic resonance explain phenomena such as telepathy and instinctive behaviors?**
- **Sheldrake’s Perspective:** Sheldrake suggests that phenomena like telepathy and instinctive behaviors may be explained by morphic resonance, where individuals can influence each other across distances through shared fields. This could account for the seemingly instantaneous transmission of information and coordinated behaviors observed in some animal species.
- **Implications:** If morphic resonance can explain telepathy and instinct, it would provide a scientific framework for understanding these phenomena, which are often relegated to the realm of the paranormal. This could have profound implications for understanding communication and behavior in both humans and animals.
4. **What role do habits play in evolution and development?**
- **Sheldrake’s Perspective:** Sheldrake posits that habits, rather than being solely the result of genetic mutations and natural selection, are also influenced by morphic fields. Habits can thus be inherited and reinforced over time through repeated behaviors, creating a collective memory that shapes future generations.
- **Implications:** This view suggests that evolution is not just a random process but is guided by the accumulated habits of past organisms. It implies a more directed and rapid form of evolution where behaviors can be transmitted across generations without genetic changes, potentially explaining the rapid emergence of complex traits.
5. **How do morphic fields interact with physical fields and forces?**
- **Sheldrake’s Perspective:** Sheldrake explores the possibility that morphic fields interact with known physical fields (like electromagnetic fields) and forces (such as gravity) to influence the physical world. This interaction could provide a bridge between the material and informational aspects of reality.
- **Implications:** Understanding how morphic fields interact with physical fields could lead to a unified theory of biology and physics, offering new insights into the fundamental nature of reality. It could also pave the way for technological advancements based on manipulating morphic fields.
6. **Is there a collective consciousness shared among living organisms?**
- **Sheldrake’s Perspective:** The concept of morphic resonance implies a form of collective consciousness where experiences and knowledge are shared among members of a species or even across different species. This collective consciousness is mediated by morphic fields.
- **Implications:** This idea challenges the notion of individual consciousness as isolated and self-contained. It suggests that consciousness is a shared phenomenon, potentially leading to a deeper understanding of social behaviors, empathy, and the interconnectedness of life.
By raising these questions, Rupert Sheldrake encourages a re-examination of fundamental scientific concepts and opens the door to exploring new avenues of research. Whether one agrees with his theories or not, the questions themselves are valuable for pushing the boundaries of scientific inquiry and fostering a deeper exploration of the mysteries of life and the universe.
How many things that just tie together is mind-blowing enough... trying to apply those concepts to archeological discoveries is so very, very difficult for me to wrap my brain around... but somehow it always circles back 😂