/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15558232
>evolutionary history

The theory of evolution has been disproved
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0022519377900443

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2199970/
>A method of targeted random mutagenesis has been used to investigate the informational content of 25 residue positions in two alpha-helical regions of the N-terminal domain of lambda repressor. Examination of the functionally allowed sequences indicates that there is a wide range in tolerance to amino acid substitution at these positions. At positions that are buried in the structure, there are severe limitations on the number and type of residues allowed. At most surface positions, many different residues and residue types are tolerated. However, at several surface positions there is a strong preference for hydrophilic amino acids, and at one surface position proline is absolutely conserved. The results reveal the high level of degeneracy in the information that specifies a particular protein fold.

This study was conducted at M.I.T where the authors experimented with re-building proteins by taking away amino acids and replacing them with other amino acids. They found that some parts of a protein chain are tolerant to substitutions but other parts are completely intolerant, showing that proteins are not arbitrary collections of component chemicals but rare and unique combinations. This confirm the conclusion of my first source that the probability of a specific folded protein coming into being by undirected evolution is 1 in 10(65). The practically infinite number of other combinations that could form at random are useless protein sequences for living organisms.

>>15558240
>Life is highly unlikely
And yet here we are. Curious.

>>15558232
intelligence improved enough for it to be useful

>>15558309
That's a circular answer. My question is why humans were evolutionary pressured to become highly intelligent while other primates managed to remain at "animal" level and thrive well.

>>15558397
Not the one you were talking to but we were already intelligent before speech. It just seems that speech makes us smarter which isn't true because the recording of said speech is what makes us appear to be smarter. Dolphins have some kind of language, if they could somehow figure out a way to store that, its not farfetched to think that they would end up like us.

>>15558278
right, the theory of evolution predicts that we shouldn't be here, but here we are, so the theory is clearly wrong

>>15558397
Multiple species can't be in the same ecological niche. Kind of like how you can't have things which act like lions, eat everything lions eat and reside in the same environment as lions. Eventually over time one species will out-compete the other. There can only be one "human" species, just like how all the archaic hominids died out or absorbed into the human genepool.

You might as well ask why humans are the only primates with flat feet. They're just eventualities, they are not what makes us essentially intelligent.

>>15558397
Humans evolved in environmental conditions that were stable on civilizational timescales (hundreds of years) but unstable on evolutionary timescales (thousands to millions of years). There are multiple evolutionary strategies to deal with such, but preadaptations (already having hands, being social, having ape-level intelligence) meant that increasing intelligence yielded the best results.

>>15558418
>the theory of evolution predicts that we shouldn't be here
No it fucking doesn't retard. Merely that it is unlikely, and yet here we are.

>>15558240
stop posting bait on every thread

>>15558232
From an observer's perspective, isn't it almost frightening how much of an advantage intelligence gives us where we brutally mog any other competitors in our ecosystem and it isn't even close?

>>15558232
One of the severely underestimated answers is that humans (and some of adjacent hominids) had a good combination of traits to make the complex speech useful, at least compared to other primates. I'm saying complex speech, because other primates do have some systems of calls and shouts.

Notably, the combination of being highly social (more than gorillas and orangutans) and the often overlooked mutation preventing the full development of the jaw, which gave humans and their ancestors the proportional cranial volume comparable to prepubescent chimps. Basically, primates have rather small set of genes switching between big jaws and big brains and we hit it.

>>15558730
you are very easily triggered and have vanishingly little emotional self control

>>15558232
probably a pressure for more advanced communication.

>>15558240
oh man this schizo is NEVER gonna stop linking this retarded half assed paper kekekekek new board feature

>>15558240
I thought most bacterium could exist with as few as 20 amino acids??? Why would this paper just lie and say life can't start with 49 amino acids? Also this is a paper from FIFTY FUCKING YEARS AGO?!?!? HAHAHAHAHA

>>15558240
>The theory of evolution has been disproved
>links papers about biogenesis instead of evolution
nigger learn to read what you're posting

>>15558232
I remember reading somewhere that neanderthals whould have had the capacity for speech, but their morphology would prevent them from making some sounds that humans can make.

>>15559903
why did only some primates get pressured and others didnt?