Slashdot Mirror
Are You Man or Mouse?
fygment writes "... according to recent studies. It seems were more closely related to rodents than the carnivores i.e. the primates didn't evolve from the noble jungle cats, wolves, etc. Were closer to rats. Of course this has long been suspected in lawyers and SCO execs ..."
so watch your tounge when you are saying they are lawyers.. or even SCO execs.. you insensitive clod!
Of course this has long been suspected in lawyers and SCO execs ...
I believe you are having trouble telling the difference between rodents and dung beetles.
..but that doesn't explain why my tail is on the front side.
Marxist evolution is just N generations away!
The blurb from "fygment" must have been written by a mouse, as there's hardly a complete sentence in that jumble of incoherent fragments. I find this situation has become all too common on slashdot recently. If you can't be bothered to write a cohesive paragraph with complete sentences, then stop submitting to slashdot. You may not think it's important, but when you write things that will be read by a number of people it is essential. Use whatever style you want in email or IM but if you're going to submit something for public consumption you should take the time to learn how to use English, otherwise you just come off looking like a rambling idiot.
Does this explain pack rats?
Someone hates these cans.
But we knew this all along after all the mice built this planet
"Mice are not, as is commonly assumed on Earth, small white squeaking animals who spend a lot of time being experimented on.
In fact, they are the protrusions into our dimension of hyper-intellegent pan-dimensional beings. These beings are in fact responsible for the creation of the Earth."
See the video here waning its real media
Bad Panda! No Bamboo for you! In matters of importance ACs will not be responded to. Want to say something critical,OK
> i.e. the primates didn't evolve from the noble jungle cats, wolves, etc.
And just who the hell ever thought they _had_? This is hardly news for anyone who went through public school in the U.S. in the last, oh, 25 years or so. This is analogous to saying, "It turns out the Moon isn't made of recycled condoms." Okay, I think we already knew that.
And what your proof against evolution?
wasnt this found out like years ago, i thought it was common knowledge..
For The Best Jazz/Hip-hop fusion > COlD DUCK
Does this explain the Mallrats?
-------
Support Indy Music. Buy
And men.
What have men got to do with this?
Q.
Insert Signature Here
Perhaps this research will allow to make some adjustments to the tree. However, there are already interesting facts in the current version. For example, bats are closer to primates than most other mammals. On the other hand, armadillos must have branched very early, although they did it after opossums.
The mammalian line forks into one group that goes on to split into felines and canines, and another that further splits into rodents and primates.
Next this poster will post an article that says Birds are closer to reptiles than to humans. I'm no biologist but I can tell when someone tries to pass an encyclopaedia fact for a breakthrough news.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
That same bit of text jumped out at me as well. This article is hyped as saying we're closer to rats then anything else, but really, it's still just saying that primates (human, chimpanzee, baboon) are closer to rats then we are to cats, dogs, cows, and pigs.
Thanks, I couldn't have figured that myself. I suppose the follow up article is that cats, dogs, cows and pigs are closer to rats then they are to fish.
What a non story.
"Inattention makes clowns of us all" -Bean
What about chickens?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/535945.stm
Do you only have one button?
In case you have no idea what the submission actually says (I must've read it ten times over before giving up), this is the one from the top of the article:
Summary: A pioneering study comparing the genes of 13 species has uncovered clues to how the vertebrate family tree might have evolved. One intriguing result is that primates, including humans, are closer to rodents than carnivores or cows and pigs. Many pieces of DNA that don't even code for proteins in all these species however are conserved, suggesting that even so-called 'junk' DNA may have an important role in biology.
So, I suppose this means the title of Steinbeck's book Of Mice and Men is redundant.
... or do the decent thing and pull it off the site.
Editors need some basic depth in the fields discussed at least to ensure they don't make a mockery target of themselves and the site in general.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
We are closely related to creatures that climb trees to escape preditors, we have been known to do the same. I was once treed by a Grizzly myself. Humans have been on the carnivor diner list in the past and in some situations they still are. It should come as no suprise that we are closer in genetics to rats than cats. Rodents can be very preditory in the right situation. I am not at all suprised by these findings. Unfortunately the ignorant religous fundimentalists are going to have another reason to bash genetic science. I would not be suprised if these scientific result are not at all popular. You can bet some scientists will be hired to repute them the same way they did with Darwin.
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
I believe it has already been the consensus for many years that primates and rodents had a common rodent-like ancestor. So all this really does is confirm what we already knew, in the face of some minor wacko fringe theory about cat ancestors that nobody paid any attention to anyway.
Tha part of the tree you refer to is unresolved , a polytomy.
What is important in a phylogenetic tree is branching order. When the branching order is uncertain or ambiguous, a polytomy is put in place. The placement of the branches in a polytomy are usually arbitrary, or in alphabetical order.
From the tree, you can tell that primates are most closely related to tree shrews, and that the group (primates + tree shrews) in turn is most closely related to bats and colugos.
> That is, of course, if you buy into the farce of evolution. I've never seen a generation so inclinced to believe a lie without proof. If you'd think for yourself, and not read the textbooks, you might realize that evolution isn't even an option.
Not read the textbooks? Sounds like "stay ignorant" is the key to your plan for understanding the universe.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Well, i guess you could argue that we are descended from mice, in that we are their creation (to find the ultimate question)
PS Unless I'm one of the inferior parts of this computer and didn't see it, I'm surprised there was no D.Adams reference before.
I, for one, welcome our new rodent overlords!
"There is no teacher but the enemy."-Mazer Rackham
I often heard that rats are used so much as test animals in laboratories because they react similarly to humans when you expose them to chemicals, lack or abundance of food etc.
-- Cheers!
Troll away but a 500-700lb grizz finds going up a thin branched skinny tree a little difficult and usually has trouble getting up trees in general. Claws can't quite hold the weight. A 400 lb black bear is a different story. You get out of the way of a snorting, barking Grizz and they will usually leave you be. Just kind of stamp off knowing they are boss, if they are just trying to tell you to fuck off. If the Grizzly is thinking you are food though you are toast. Blacks are a different story if they think you are dinner then you had better make them hesitate by whacking them hard with a stick. In my case the Grizzly hesitated to climb the tree and really was not sure if I was edible or not, I smelled funny too as insect repelant and a guy who is fishing and hasn't washed for a week gets a little high. Anyway the guys who I was with could hear me yellin' and came running with a bear banger. That put the bear off real quick. He dicided to go look for lunch somewhere else. I was happy with his choice and did not hold a grudge. Afterall we were both after fish him anything that swims me steelhead to shake hands with.
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
This is still the center of a heated debate. With modern genetic science we've determined that trolls lay somewhere between the rodent and the lawyer ( with SCO executives up next). Yet there's clearly still a large difference between rodents and trolls, and many scientists feel that the only way to settle the debate will be to find a half-rodent half-troll step. The deep jungles of Africa and Redmond, WA are focal points for this search currently.
One thing remains clear, your modern homosapien very clearly branches off from the modern SCO executive at the rodent.
As an owner of pet rats, one thing I've noticed is their sometimes disturbing similarities to humans in habit.
At one point, my two female rats were constantly squeeking and making noise at night. No problem, nocturnal animals, they're just more active in the dark. However, I also noticed that oftimes when I turned on the lights, that the rodents were "cleaning each other" in a position often labelled as a number just shy of seventy.
Now, at first I dismissed this, thinking that I was imagining things. However, after talking to several rat owners and a few petshops, I have garnered that this can indeed be more than simply a hygienic practice.
Afterwards, I'd throw things at the cage when they made too much noise to shut them up. At least until one morning after I found they'd dragged in the shirt I'd thrown and perforated it for nesting material. I liked that shirt too.
Now, I've got two new rats. They don't often exhibit the same behavior as the old ones, but sometimes they will. I'm considering breeding one of them (baby rodents being quite cute 'n all), and I wonder if this will change their behavior towards each other after the babies have grown (and one rat has had an encounter of the opposite sex as opposed to the same). And of course, if I got enough rats perhaps I could make some of this
Is it prehensile? I've always had this dream of making a live action version of La Blue Girl, and you might have just what I've been looking for in a leading man.
We are DEVO!
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
according to the great guide, mice made the Earth. Humans such as ourselves evolved from the useless third of a lost civilization that was wiped out by a payphone-spread virus.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
Why people think that the core ideas of biology should be something you can accept or reject after a few minutes of armchair quarterback thought without so much as a textbook is beyond me. The arrogance is astounding.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
Nah, the textbooks have too much junque in them. Get rid of the "must prove evolution even if we have to use arguments proven wrong 125 years ago" approach and maybe you'd get some respect.
Get rid of the "fossils date the rocks, but the rocks date the fossils more accurately" circular logic.
Deal with hard science, not speculation. Then textbooks and science would gain more respect.
There's a reason most reseachers use mice and rats, and it's not just because of size. Scientists have known for some time that we are most similar to mice in some respects, escpecially in how our immune systems function.