The skulls from humans from the Pleistocene opoch (roughly 2.6 million to 12,000 years ago) show an unusully high level of genetic abnormalities. Scientists have seen these abnormalities from early **** erectus to the end of the early stone age. Such high frequency of genetic abnormalities indicate and reinforce the idea that during much of this period of human evolution, human populations where small, and highly likely to be inbred.
Furthermore, the appearance of the Caucasian, a recessive trait among homosapians, also supports the conclusion that humans are largely the result of inbreeding. DNA mapping showing very little genetic diversity also suggests humans decended from a very small pool of ancestors.
With reference to Darwin's theory of evolution it is inbreeding that proves it out. Those animals that have developed the desirable characteristics to survive increase the likely outcome for their offspring by mating with animals who posses similar characteristics (this often is only found in closely related individuals). In this way almost all 'pure bred' species are the result of inbreeding.
With respect, my reference to playing god was intended as a precautionary thought evoking statement and not intended in a literal sense. In a theological sense, 'playing god' has little to no basis. I do agree that any decision we make to change the natural evolution of a species is not an easy call, but then again, human evolution has given us the power to do this, so perhaps after all we are doing what simply comes naturally.
Returning to the OP, I think we can agree, that inbreeding with reptiles can be used in a manner that is benificial to our own personal persuits and aspirations and if we apply rigorous controls can be of benifit to the captive reptile populations.
Regards
Wing_Nut
Furthermore, the appearance of the Caucasian, a recessive trait among homosapians, also supports the conclusion that humans are largely the result of inbreeding. DNA mapping showing very little genetic diversity also suggests humans decended from a very small pool of ancestors.
With reference to Darwin's theory of evolution it is inbreeding that proves it out. Those animals that have developed the desirable characteristics to survive increase the likely outcome for their offspring by mating with animals who posses similar characteristics (this often is only found in closely related individuals). In this way almost all 'pure bred' species are the result of inbreeding.
With respect, my reference to playing god was intended as a precautionary thought evoking statement and not intended in a literal sense. In a theological sense, 'playing god' has little to no basis. I do agree that any decision we make to change the natural evolution of a species is not an easy call, but then again, human evolution has given us the power to do this, so perhaps after all we are doing what simply comes naturally.
Returning to the OP, I think we can agree, that inbreeding with reptiles can be used in a manner that is benificial to our own personal persuits and aspirations and if we apply rigorous controls can be of benifit to the captive reptile populations.
Regards
Wing_Nut
