FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Men's sex chromosome is doomed: scientist





nickfyoung
Evolutionary geneticist Jenny Graves claims the Y chromosome is disappearing.

"If humans don't become extinct, new sex-determining genes and chromosomes will evolve, maybe leading to the evolution of new hominid species.'

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/mens-sex-chromosome-is-doomed-scientist/story-e6frf7kf-1226611171605

I thought I asked that question a while ago.
ocalhoun
So, one scientist expects the 'y' chromosome to disappear in about 5 million years...

This doesn't strike me as a big deal.
The earliest known homo sapiens dates to 200,000 years ago. I, personally would be very surprised if humans are still identifiable as homo sapiens at all in 25 times that long.

(In other words, I don't think a genetic change within 5,000,000 years is much news for a species only 200,000 years old.)
Bikerman
Quite right - I believe Indi made that exact point in regard to an earlier set of questions about human evolution - and I made similar points about human evolution in the same thread. I actually don't see sexuality disappearing anytime soon. It must (and does) offer some major advantages to be worth the investment - the biologists will be able to say more about this but my understanding is that sexual reproduction is still a bit of a puzzle - why use it rather than the easier and much more reliable asexual methods? None of that mucking around with different genders and trying to get germ cells from one to another without damaging them. Why not just split down the middle when required? (I'm actually serious - sexual reproduction has a lot of drawbacks compared to asexual). The biggie must be the genetic mixing element. Sexual offers heaps of chances to give the gene pool a good stir whereas asexual doesn't. That one advantage outweighs all the disadvantages and loss of efficiency.

Interestingly some species can do both = the Komodo dragon is one example (corals are another). Komodos can reproduce parthenogenesis - this is a real example as opposed to some religious claims about middle-eastern women having the same ability Smile
When the grouping or individual Komodo is stressed - say during a long-term famine - the female can switch to asexual reproduction and keep the numbers up. It works as a short term measure (all the offspring are male, so it can only BE short-term).
nickfyoung
Asexual reproduction wouldn't be as much fun though would it. When you look at the whole process of pairing off and creating the reproduction process, it seems to be a complete package of intimacy and lifestyle and seems to be found in some animal species too.
Some animal species seem to form a lifetime bond with a partner while we are making it more and more temporary.
Some marriage Councillors will tell you that the sexual part of the relationship is one third of the whole thing making it very important. So the reproduction part is more than just the reproduction but a major part of the intimacy of you and your partner.
What would replace that in a relationship, would there be any relationships.
watersoul
nickfyoung wrote:
So the reproduction part is more than just the reproduction but a major part of the intimacy of you and your partner.
What would replace that in a relationship, would there be any relationships.

I haven't had sex to create a child for 15+ years.
Procreation and recreational sex are two very different things Wink
nickfyoung
watersoul wrote:
nickfyoung wrote:
So the reproduction part is more than just the reproduction but a major part of the intimacy of you and your partner.
What would replace that in a relationship, would there be any relationships.

I haven't had sex to create a child for 15+ years.
Procreation and recreational sex are two very different things Wink



That is exactly the point...
watersoul
I certainly think as long as erogenous zones continue to exist in tandem with orgasm then even if we do not 'need' sex to create life we will still be at it for recreational reasons.
nickfyoung
With asexual reproduction, what promps the female to reproduce. It must come naturally and is it a condition prompted by not being pregnant. Does that mean she is perpetually pregnant and having offspring. Can't see that being popular with human population.
watersoul
nickfyoung wrote:
With asexual reproduction, what promps the female to reproduce. It must come naturally and is it a condition prompted by not being pregnant. Does that mean she is perpetually pregnant and having offspring. Can't see that being popular with human population.

I'd certainly be glad I was born a bloke if that was the case!
Bikerman
nickfyoung wrote:
With asexual reproduction, what promps the female to reproduce. It must come naturally and is it a condition prompted by not being pregnant. Does that mean she is perpetually pregnant and having offspring. Can't see that being popular with human population.
Why not? Do you not think that there are regulatory systems in sexual reproduction? Why would asexual present special problems in that regard?
nickfyoung
Bikerman wrote:
nickfyoung wrote:
With asexual reproduction, what promps the female to reproduce. It must come naturally and is it a condition prompted by not being pregnant. Does that mean she is perpetually pregnant and having offspring. Can't see that being popular with human population.
Why not? Do you not think that there are regulatory systems in sexual reproduction? Why would asexual present special problems in that regard?


It would certainly guarantee the continuation of the species but in a human format it would change the whole dynamics of the species as we know it now.
watersoul
Why would the dynamics change?
Male and female children would be born, and contraceptive techniques would adapt as necessary.
nickfyoung
watersoul wrote:
Why would the dynamics change?
Male and female children would be born, and contraceptive techniques would adapt as necessary.



Yes but there would be no sex between a man and a woman, no need to partner off and no intimate relationships. Surly that would make for a different society.
watersoul
nickfyoung wrote:
watersoul wrote:
Why would the dynamics change?
Male and female children would be born, and contraceptive techniques would adapt as necessary.



Yes but there would be no sex between a man and a woman, no need to partner off and no intimate relationships. Surly that would make for a different society.

Why not?
I have sex because it is pleasurable.
I still 'partner off' even though I do not want to create a new human being.
Shared activities, fun, silliness, celebration of just being alive with someone to share it. Creating new kids is the last thing involved in such enjoyable things.
nickfyoung
watersoul wrote:
nickfyoung wrote:
watersoul wrote:
Why would the dynamics change?
Male and female children would be born, and contraceptive techniques would adapt as necessary.



Yes but there would be no sex between a man and a woman, no need to partner off and no intimate relationships. Surly that would make for a different society.

Why not?
I have sex because it is pleasurable.
I still 'partner off' even though I do not want to create a new human being.
Shared activities, fun, silliness, celebration of just being alive with someone to share it. Creating new kids is the last thing involved in such enjoyable things.


I would think that if a woman was reproducing by asexual means she would not be interested in sex with a man. Same as a dog who is not on heat.

While your relationship could still exist to take the sexual intimacy part out would sort of change things although I guess we would adapt to other means to have that.
watersoul
nickfyoung wrote:
watersoul wrote:
nickfyoung wrote:
watersoul wrote:
Why would the dynamics change?
Male and female children would be born, and contraceptive techniques would adapt as necessary.



Yes but there would be no sex between a man and a woman, no need to partner off and no intimate relationships. Surly that would make for a different society.

Why not?
I have sex because it is pleasurable.
I still 'partner off' even though I do not want to create a new human being.
Shared activities, fun, silliness, celebration of just being alive with someone to share it. Creating new kids is the last thing involved in such enjoyable things.


I would think that if a woman was reproducing by asexual means she would not be interested in sex with a man. Same as a dog who is not on heat.

While your relationship could still exist to take the sexual intimacy part out would sort of change things although I guess we would adapt to other means to have that.

Haha! Ohmygosh, do you think women only have sex to procreate?!!
As long as orgasm and pleasurable feelings remain possible then people will have sex just because it is nice.
I'm glad the women in my area do not only have sex to make babies. Let me know where you are in a private message and I shall make sure I do not move there! Laughing
nickfyoung
watersoul wrote:
nickfyoung wrote:
watersoul wrote:
nickfyoung wrote:
watersoul wrote:
Why would the dynamics change?
Male and female children would be born, and contraceptive techniques would adapt as necessary.



Yes but there would be no sex between a man and a woman, no need to partner off and no intimate relationships. Surly that would make for a different society.

Why not?
I have sex because it is pleasurable.
I still 'partner off' even though I do not want to create a new human being.
Shared activities, fun, silliness, celebration of just being alive with someone to share it. Creating new kids is the last thing involved in such enjoyable things.


I would think that if a woman was reproducing by asexual means she would not be interested in sex with a man. Same as a dog who is not on heat.

While your relationship could still exist to take the sexual intimacy part out would sort of change things although I guess we would adapt to other means to have that.

Haha! Ohmygosh, do you think women only have sex to procreate?!!
As long as orgasm and pleasurable feelings remain possible then people will have sex just because it is nice.
I'm glad the women in my area do not only have sex to make babies. Let me know where you are in a private message and I shall make sure I do not move there! Laughing



LOL
Indi
nickfyoung wrote:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/mens-sex-chromosome-is-doomed-scientist/story-e6frf7kf-1226611171605


ocalhoun wrote:
So, one scientist expects the 'y' chromosome to disappear in about 5 million years...

"Breaking news": something might happen to the human genome in, like, 5 million years.

I ****** love science journalism.
Related topics
Study: Men Enjoy Seeing Bad People Suffer
friendshp between men and women
Any Hindus ?
love or sex ?
Unfaithful - Why Men Cheat
Are men by right higher than woman?
Murphys Sex Law
MURPHY'S LAWS ON SEX
Friendship between men and women
Distinguishing between sex and love for gay men difficult?!?
How can one live without God?
Men/Women/Marriage/Sex
Do you Really Need Sex??
Why girls put good guys on a friendzone?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Philosophy and Religion

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.