Slashdot Mirror
15 Mutations Resulted In Increased Brain Size
naoursla writes "Researchers at the University of Chicago think they have identified 15 mutations in a gene responsible for brain development that gave humans abilities of abstract thought and planning. The article is at Discover.
They plan to insert the gene into mice to 'to see what affect it has on brain development.'"
It doesnt seem too far fetched now does it? How long until global mouse domination?
I don't think we have to worry, so long as we don't make rubber pants their size.
HSJ$$*&#^!#+++ATH0
NO CARRIER
Big brains in small skulls might not be such a good idea...
"These creatures you call mice, you see, they are not quite as they appear. They are merely the protrusion into our dimension of vast hyperintelligent pandimensional beings. The whole business with the cheese and the squeaking is just a front."
-- Slartibartfast, The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy
X(7): A program for managing terminal windows. See also screen(1).
"Lahn found that the ASPM gene in humans has undergone 15 important mutations since we last shared a common ancestor with chimpanzees, about 5 million years ago."
One would think that the asymmetric laterality associated with language would be one of the important "human" mutations. It's not. Chimps have the same sort of asymmetry as humans in the "language" area of the brain: 'Demonstration of a human-like asymmetry of Wernicke's brain language area homolog in chimpanzee planum temporale.' (Gannon, et al., 1998). I suspect there's going to be far more than 15 mutations required to explain things, going back much, much farther than 5 million years.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
root# diff gwbush_genome.map jdoe_genome.map
Let's just hope the experimental subjects don't look at the writing on their cages and comprehend.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
They may want to look at the genetic mutations of dolphins and find out what made them have such a large brain, and be so intelligent that all that they do is swim in the water, eat fish and play around, whereas we build cars and buildings, and start wars.
Bruce Sterling wrote a very funny story along these lines, called "Our Neural Chernobyl". In his story, the virus used to transport the genes escapes (naturally!), but doesn't actually turn out to be much of a problem for people, except for creating a few navel-gazers. (This goes with a constant theme of Sterling's, that raw intelligence is an overrated commodity.) But the fun begins when the virus jumps to other species. So you get racoons that learn to pick locks, coyotes that organize protection rackets against ranchers, etc. Collected here.
Technically, I think that would make you God's Advocate, which could be an important distinction, for billing purposes.
But yeah, race of hyper-intellegent rodents, not really getting my vote for the Bright Idea 2004 Sweepstakes.
I imagine walking out of the house one day into a giant springloaded trapped baited with porn and the latest ATI card.
What were you expecting?
Here I am, with the brain the size of human, trapped in the body of a rodent.
"And here I am, with the brain the size of a rodent, trapped in the body of a human." - George W. Bush
They should try the gene on him first!
Frankly, I don't think this is funny in the least.
The purposeful attempt to induce human-like intelligence in a lower species strikes me as one of the more vile and obscene pursuits a man of "science" [whatever that is] could possibly undertake. And, given the record of "scientists" and their truly vile and obscene pursuits throughout the ages, that's saying something.
Frankly, it strikes me as an affront against God.
"Affront against God" is one of those meaningless, yet highly emotionally charged, statements that can apply to almost anything.
First: I presume by "God" you are referring to the Christian God. Not everyone is Christian. Chances are that you would be offended if a Hindu person tried to shut down our scientific pursuits by declaring them "an affront against Vishnu", or tried to stop you from eating beef owing to the cow's status as a sacred animal. Why should a non-Christian care whether or not the Christian God is affronted?
Second: How do you know that the Christian God would be affronted in the first place? The Bible, to the best of my knowledge, does not tell us (even indirectly) not to tinker with mouse genes in an attempt to make them smarter. Even if the Bible does contain passages that might be interpreted in this fashion, A) it's a matter of interpretation, and B) modern-day Christians already ignore huge passages of the Bible, so what's one more?
Third: What makes this "vile and obscene"? A statement like that requires some exposition.
ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
BTW: Great book. Covers what happened to his brain post autopsy. Full of neuro knowledge and witticisms.
Word is, they've spliced human brain capacity into snakes, 800-pound gorillas, and dinosaurs.
Nah. Let's do it right. First we'll make them curious, then punish them for it. Then, after several generations of inbreeding, we'll raze one of their cities to make an example. After that, we'll say to hell with it, and kill all but two of them, but give them some shiny things in return. After few more generations of inbreeding, we'll micromanage their goverments with plauges and killing sprees. Then we'll command them to worship us, and, oh yeah, to not be evil. Finally, we'll give them conflicting accounts of our existance, tell them to kill the nonbelievers, and let them fight it out.