Guest nona Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Why would it be impossible? Essentially your nuclear DNA is a combination of your father's and your mother's lineage. Basically you receive 50% from each side. If for example, long ago a homo. sapiens female met with the proto-Sasquatch male of modern day Sasquatch and they somehow mated and conceived a child you would expect the child to have basically half of the father's nDNA and half of the mother's nDNA. If what occurred in reality was to match the theoretical principles of Mendel you were taught in grade school you would expect if the offspring from further generations of this half-human, half-sasquatch mated with pure-breed Sasquatch after just a few generations the human nDNA would essentially disappear. However, in reality crossover will occur. Essentially segments of your mother's DNA will trade places with segments of your father's DNA and as a result the chromosomes themselves will be a combination of DNA from your father's and mother's side. So you would expect that some remnants of human DNA would still remain in further generations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Nona, do you think it would be possible to calculate the number of generations back to the pure 50 50 hybrid. Or would the potential for breeding with other hybrids throw it off in this hypothetical? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nona Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 Nona, do you think it would be possible to calculate the number of generations back to the pure 50 50 hybrid. Or would the potential for breeding with other hybrids throw it off in this hypothetical? Interesting question from the man under a NDA. Well, if we were to continue with the hypothetical situation I started with HODS, one should theoretically be able to analyze the mtDNA of one of these human/sasquatch mix breeds and roughly estimate how long ago that human mother of all modern Sasquatch was plucked from human society. Now, if you happened to know how long it takes for the average human/sasquatch mix to reach sexual maturity, you could take the period of time you established earlier and divide it by this average to get another rough estimate of how many generations back was that first 50/50 offspring conceived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 I've gone over a couple possibilities and haven't settled upon one 100%: 1. Of a different homo branch, meaning it's more man than animal. 2. A chimera created by advanced man maybe a million years ago. 3. PreAdamite man (going with religious text) or a prototype that was abandoned for "modern" man (going with the alien creation thing). 4. Dimensional being that occassionally enters into our bubble of reality. I've been pondering whether humans have created our own "bubble" of reality. Something has to be recognized by us collectively for it too be real or rather "register" with us. An example that has been untested is the manner in which for many people, if something isn't scientifically documented...then it doesn't exist, many of the people here. So if a alien or BF was standing right in front of them....would they see it....or would it not register? 5. Offspring of the nephilim...perhaps the most frightening hypothesis! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 Interesting question from the man under a NDA. And your above replys are equally interesting coming from someone who couldn't understand what we could compare suspect Squatch DNA to, in order to prove their existence. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted August 1, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted August 1, 2011 It is possible for them to have human mtDNA but have 100% nuclear DNA from their own species as long as they are able to breed with humans. Silver Fox alluded to this idea. I believe that I read somewhere that mtDNA is interchangeable among mammals because the proteins that are encoded are the same across species. I seem to remember reading that genetic engineering could swap out the mitchondrial dna from the organelles but it seems it would take some manipulation.....among nuclear dna scenarios creating a possible one in a million scenario is the case of uniparental disomy. It seems to usually affect a single chromosome in known disorders.....if it were extended to multiple chromosomes I suppose some strange things could happen. Granted the odds are low, so was ardi., flo. and the rest of the bunch a few years back. http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/handbook/inheritance/updimprinting Uniparental disomy Uniparental disomy (UPD) occurs when a person receives two copies of a chromosome, or part of a chromosome, from one parent and no copies from the other parent. UPD can occur as a random event during the formation of egg or sperm cells or may happen in early fetal development. In many cases, UPD likely has no effect on health or development. Because most genes are not imprinted, it doesn’t matter if a person inherits both copies from one parent instead of one copy from each parent. In some cases, however, it does make a difference whether a gene is inherited from a person’s mother or father. A person with UPD may lack any active copies of essential genes that undergo genomic imprinting. This loss of gene function can lead to delayed development, mental retardation, or other medical problems. Several genetic disorders can result from UPD or a disruption of normal genomic imprinting. The most well-known conditions include Prader-Willi syndrome, which is characterized by uncontrolled eating and obesity, and Angelman syndrome, which causes mental retardation and impaired speech. Both of these disorders can be caused by UPD or other errors in imprinting involving genes on the long arm of chromosome 15. Other conditions, such as Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome (a disorder characterized by accelerated growth and an increased risk of cancerous tumors), are associated with abnormalities of imprinted genes on the short arm of chromosome 11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest squatchrider Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 I really want to know where the forum stands on this! Speak up and be heard; but be polite with others. Play nice now... HG I voted closer to an ape but have to admit that since humans and apes are so closely related I'm not sure which direction my vote should go. According to some DNA research humans and chimps are about 2% different genetically. So if the Sasquatch is somewhere between us on that genetic line theoretically it could be 1% different than modern humans and 1% different than chimps landing pretty much right in between the two of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nona Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 And your above replys are equally interesting coming from someone who couldn't understand what we could compare suspect Squatch DNA to, in order to prove their existence. Well, you know my stance on what you are referring to. If you forgot I am sure you can find that thread. If you had noticed if in this hypothetical situation I presented here I made no mention of trying to tie an unknown DNA sequence to the description of some creature. You could substitute the word "Sasquatch" in my last two post with "Easter Bunny" and "hypothetically" speaking the theories should still apply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nona Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 (edited) I seem to remember reading that genetic engineering could swap out the mitchondrial dna from the organelles but it seems it would take some manipulation.....among nuclear dna scenarios creating a possible one in a million scenario is the case of uniparental disomy. It seems to usually affect a single chromosome in known disorders.....if it were extended to multiple chromosomes I suppose some strange things could happen. Granted the odds are low, so was ardi., flo. and the rest of the bunch a few years back. As for using uniparental disomy as an example of how HODS' prior statement could possibly occur, I would say the odds are far greater than one in a million. Simply put it's basically the stuff of science-fiction. Edited August 2, 2011 by Jodie edited out off topic reference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted August 1, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted August 1, 2011 I still believe genetic improbabilities could be a factor in human heredity and evolution. PS I'm not a moderator and digging at them will not put you in favor with one (but I do happen to be one of three management people who help run this forum). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nona Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 (edited) I still believe genetic improbabilities could be a factor in human heredity and evolution. I can't disagree entirely with that statement. Edited August 2, 2011 by Jodie edited out off topic references Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roland Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 (edited) I am not sure how to take this, but I just watched Lloyd Pye's lecture "everything you know is wrong" and listened to what he brought forth actually twice. After picking up my jaw in astonishment and actually shock as if even 1/4 of what he talks about is true we really have been drinking a long tall glass of propaganda for a very long time. So there is a possible long shot that there could be another option and that is modern man is the genetically altered form of the original human who we refer to as Sasquatch. Man that ties everything into a nice package where things make sense, but wow what a heavy concept to swallow. Now Mr. Pye I am sure has his followers and pundits so I wont debate his study, but just wanted to throw this into the mixer. So there may be another option to the survey in that modern Humans are the genetically altered version of the original human species that we call Sasquatch. Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNGngZsxAhw Edited August 1, 2011 by Roland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 (edited) If you had noticed if in this hypothetical situation I presented here I made no mention of trying to tie an unknown DNA sequence to the description of some creature. You could substitute the word "Sasquatch" in my last two post with "Easter Bunny" and "hypothetically" speaking the theories should still apply. As long as the hypothetical still had one known in the mix, yes you could know you had a crossbreed of some kind. You're still comparing knowns to unknowns to find something new. Do you agree? Edited August 2, 2011 by southernyahoo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 I am not sure how to take this, but I just watched Lloyd Pye's lecture "everything you know is wrong" and listened to what he brought forth actually twice. After picking up my jaw in astonishment and actually shock as if even 1/4 of what he talks about is true we really have been drinking a long tall glass of propaganda for a very long time. So there is a possible long shot that there could be another option and that is modern man is the genetically altered form of the original human who we refer to as Sasquatch. Man that ties everything into a nice package where things make sense, but wow what a heavy concept to swallow. Now Mr. Pye I am sure has his followers and pundits so I wont debate his study, but just wanted to throw this into the mixer. So there may be another option to the survey in that modern Humans are the genetically altered version of the original human species that we call Sasquatch. Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNGngZsxAhw Now see, you went and made me buy a book...on Kindle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted August 2, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted August 2, 2011 Simply put it's basically the stuff of science-fiction. Hardly, but nice try, it is hard science fact of a known set of genetic mechanisms at play that most people know nothing about except specialists such as clinical geneticists. Your science fiction is somebody elses day job, sorry. What the BF dna sequence(s) will tell us could very much be inclusive of many such mechanisms. Personally I tend to believe the nuclear dna sequencing will be fairly consistent across samples but I think the mtDNA leaks may hint that it is more human than chimp/gorilla. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts