Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Human Limbs Evolved From Shark Fins Thanks To Sonic Hedgehog Gene (mirror.co.uk)

Posted by msmash on from the how-it-all-began dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report at Mirror: Scientists believe human limbs evolved from the gills of sharks -- thanks to a gene named after Sonic the Hedgehog. The discovery comes from analysis of skate, a cartilaginous fish which has much in common with sharks. Limbs, like gills, grow thanks to a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog gene' -- named after the video game character. The new discovery backs up a theory suggested 138 years ago that legs and arms evolved from prehistoric fish gills. Gizmodo has more details on this.

95 comments

  1. a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog gene' by phishybongwaters · · Score: 2

    FFS. Just no. NO.

  2. Bony fish did not evolve from sharks by jfdavis668 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Bony fish and their decedents, including tetrapods, did not evolve from sharks, but a common ancestor of both.

    1. Re:Bony fish did not evolve from sharks by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

      And ultimately, the limbs arose as a modification of the fins on lobe-finned fish.

              I looked up "sonic the hedgehog" gene and didn't find too many scholarly articles on that particular gene. Nor did I find any "Spiny Norman" gene, nor in fact any hedgehog references to any genes.

             

    2. Re:Bony fish did not evolve from sharks by Tough+Love · · Score: 5, Informative

      "evolved from SHARK fins" is a journalistic invention from mirror.co and is not the fault of the cited article, which says "evolved from the transformation of gill arches in early fish", clearly including common ancestors. It is perfectly plausible that the same gene may have descended in recognizable form down these not very widely separated branches of the evolutionary tree, that is certainly true of many other genes. What other means do we have to learn something about genes of the vanished common parent, other than studying the similarities and differences of current expression and function of recognizable descendents in dissimilar species?

      Anyway, the research is about gills, not fins, so that is another journalistic crime from mirror.co. It would have been more honest to run a headline along the lines that shark gills and human hands are essentially the same, but then would anybody read it?

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    3. Re:Bony fish did not evolve from sharks by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      The headline writers are the sharks.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    4. Re:Bony fish did not evolve from sharks by serviscope_minor · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's because it's sonic hedgehog, not sonic THE hedgehog.

      Many references:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    5. Re:Bony fish did not evolve from sharks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bony fish and their decedents, including tetrapods, did not evolve from sharks, but a common ancestor of both.

      Were that common ancestor alive today, it would likely be classified as a "shark"

    6. Re:Bony fish did not evolve from sharks by Schmorgluck · · Score: 1

      Seriously. You have to wonder if there's a lack of scientific journalists who can come up with better headlines and articles that don't twist the facts too much.

      --
      There's nothing like $HOME
    7. Re:Bony fish did not evolve from sharks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who would choose to work for peanuts? Scientists often have other options, but journalists are back to making lattes if they don't "write" and "report". We have the best science journalists that depressingly low wages can buy. You think that the gig economy for programmers is bad?

    8. Re:Bony fish did not evolve from sharks by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

      Anyway, the research is about gills, not fins, so that is another journalistic crime from mirror.co. It would have been more honest to run a headline along the lines that shark gills and human hands are essentially the same, but then would anybody read it?

      Not really, if anyone were interested they'd probably already seen the segment on Attenborough's "Rise of the Animals". Besides, you can't expect much in the way of science reporting from the Mirror.

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    9. Re:Bony fish did not evolve from sharks by Fragnet · · Score: 1

      I was about to say precisely this. In fact I've just finished watching a wonderful talk by a fish palaeontologist on more or less this very subject.

    10. Re:Bony fish did not evolve from sharks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is a reply to my theory that Humans evolved into current form from dwelling in beaches. Then Chinese/Oriental would be an overadaptation when the main Human branch had already left beaches and fully returned to prairies/firm ground. By making **human arms evolve from sharks**, Chinese and Humans are **again** a single and main branch with no important differences. It is obvious to me that in the standard model ALL land species evolved from **fish** of some form or other! (What is really meaningful is that only insects developed six limbs while all other land animals fell into the four limbs category.) This does not contradict my texts, though Chinese/Orientals do remain silent when I call them fish (and they had already boasted lots of archeological underwater discoveries).

  3. Title doesn't reflect article by Big_Oh · · Score: 5, Informative

    RTFA: from gills, not from fins.

    1. Re:Title doesn't reflect article by jimbolauski · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is the trifecta of bad /. submissions, the title contradicts the summary and/or article, a least one link in the summary is to a click bait site, and the summary has factual errors.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    2. Re:Title doesn't reflect article by srmalloy · · Score: 2

      The mirror.co.uk article does say "shark fins" in the title, so the poster was just knee-jerking TFA. The Gizmodo article is more rational on the subject; the article on mirror.co.uk is crammed full of sensationalism, like the "scientists believe" phrase at the start of the post, which implies that it's a widely- or universally-held belief, while the Gizmodo article states "Now scientists at the University of Cambridge have performed experiments on the embryos of skates that point to a possible evolutionary connection between the gills of those fish and our limbs." The mirror.co.uk article gets well down in the article before it actually quotes the principle researcher saying that "taken to an extreme" this indicates that gills and limbs share genetic programming, but that this is not yet proven, and they can't say for certain because of gaps in the fossil record. But rational, measured articles don't have the flash of waving a possible connection around as a foregone conclusion.

    3. Re:Title doesn't reflect article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even thats not accurate. It's from the gill arch, not the gills themselves.

    4. Re:Title doesn't reflect article by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      And skates, not sharks. And "are related to" not "evolved from". I understand why a rag like mirror hacked up that headline, but why did a Slashdot editor uncritically promulgate that journalistic slime? The research is fascinating enough without the outright lies.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    5. Re: Title doesn't reflect article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not suppose whine. Remember, whining is for bitches. Back in the CmdrTaco days everything was better and worse and so on. The main thing is not to whine.

    6. Re:Title doesn't reflect article by I4ko · · Score: 1

      That article is batshit insane and 19 days too late. Lungs developed from gills, limbs developed from fins. That's all backed up by a ton of evidence.

  4. Related to earlier article? by Coisiche · · Score: 0

    Hang on, I was just reading an earlier article about bogus, nonsense books on Kindle. Is this an example of one?

    1. Re:Related to earlier article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hang on, I was just reading an earlier article about bogus, nonsense books on Kindle. Is this an example of one?

      And here I was thinking that this was a misplaced April Fools post....

    2. Re:Related to earlier article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, this is an example of an article more important that M$ banning hardware with Skylake or later hardware from running Win7 or Win8 through their own shenanigans

      http://www.informationweek.com/software/microsoft-no-support-for-windows-7-windows-81-pcs-with-new-cpus/d/d-id/1323960

  5. Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is why we see so many aquatic creatures swimming around with partial arms and legs dangling off of them while in transition. The evidence is so overwhelming, we must believe it. BELIEVE!

  6. Laser Implants by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 4, Funny

    So we should all start looking into getting laser implants?

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  7. WFT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think someone has put acid in my lunch and I'm reading things from another dimension!

  8. 138 Years Ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm, guess that explains the explosive growth in technology. Hard to invent shit when your arms and legs are gills....

    1. Re:138 Years Ago by jfdavis668 · · Score: 2

      I remember back when I was little, and people were first crawling out of the swamps onto land. Never thought it would last.

    2. Re:138 Years Ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TIL: Great-great-grandpa Coward was a shark. Finn Coward he was called.

    3. Re: 138 Years Ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The summary says the theory was first proposed 138 years ago. Common, people! I'm a creationist, here. Are you really gonna let my reading comprehension be better than yours?

  9. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by Carewolf · · Score: 5, Funny

    FFS. Just no. NO.

    At least this discovery wasn't made aboard the research vessel Boaty McBoatFace.

  10. shark's teeth by cellocgw · · Score: 1

    evolved into Mackie's knife, eh?

    --
    https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
  11. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're just jealous because you didn't get to name it the Q*bert gene.

  12. So I read the summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It essentially repeated the headline twice. Thank you so much for letting me know that the entire thing is more repetitions of the headline. Saved me some reading. Thanks.

  13. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by aliquis · · Score: 1

    FFS. Just no. NO.

    Well, you do go faster on land with legs than if you don't have any. Right?

  14. I'm sure Rudyard Kipling... by macxcool · · Score: 1

    would be pleased to see his work continued. I always loved reading his 'Just So Stories' to my kids.

  15. A whole 138 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trying to get your new "science" fable published in Murica or the mods just fail that much these days?

  16. The Wee-todd-did Dice Gene by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nt

  17. That explains it by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

    I can breathe through my hands and feet. Which is torture, because foot odor.

    --

    Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  18. uh by Rich_Lather · · Score: 1

    With so many typos, I wonder if Slashdot has been hacked.

    1. Re:uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With so many typos, I wonder if Slashdot has been hacked.

      I thought that was the /. warrant canary? The time to worry is when the typos disappear.

  19. Circle of Life by paiute · · Score: 4, Funny

    Shark evolves gills.
    Gills evolve into arms.
    Arms evolve into man.
    Man invents laser.
    Shark gets laser on head.

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    1. Re:Circle of Life by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Uh... Burma Shave?

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  20. Well known by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It has been known for a long time that tetrapods (arms) evolved from lobe-finned fishes like the Coelacanth. Yawn.

    1. Re:Well known by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      This is pushing further back than lobe finned fish from what I can gather. Lobe finned fish weren't the first tetrapods.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  21. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FFS. Just no. NO.

    Could be worse.

    Imagine the "Donkey Kong" gene...

  22. No They Didn't. by zenlessyank · · Score: 1

    Humans evolved from demon semen. Evil is always just a synapse away. Evil does not evolve. It is finite. I think we have some more classes in logic to take around here. Whimmers need not apply.

    1. Re:No They Didn't. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      demon semen

      Cool name for a band.

    2. Re:No They Didn't. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Humans evolved from demon semen. ... Evil does not evolve. It is finite.

      So, if I'm following your assertions, a sufficiently large human population will be polite and civilized because the finite Evil will be distributed so thinly that even naughty language becomes a rarity?

      I can get behind this plan. And by "get behind this plan", I mean "have more sex."

    3. Re:No They Didn't. by zenlessyank · · Score: 2

      That's what I said. But the Carpenters wouldn't have anything to do with it. Go figure.

  23. And duplicated as well by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 1

    RTFA: from gills, not from fins.

    Furthermore, IIRC, the developing human foetus has gills in addition to limbs.

    So the gill that developed into a limb was *duplicated* in subsequent evolutionary models.

    I dunno - a feature morphing into another feature by natural selection seems reasonable, but a feature duplicated sounds like a stretch.

    Any evolution experts care to comment?

    1. Re:And duplicated as well by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      Fish have gill arches and fins, which may, the paper proposes, have also evolved from early gill arches.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    2. Re: And duplicated as well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Human fetuses do not have gills. These are simply folds in the skin during development of the esophageal pounches in the neck. Occasionally, a hole or tear can occur in utero, causing a hole when the child is born. If they were gills there would be blood vessels or other evidence of gill structure around the opening.

      Also, natural selection does not morph things. Natural selection is just the name given to the filtering process that allows living things with a variant characteristic to survive in an environment that favors it (within the same species classification). But that variation was simply an adaptation or already existed in the population, and went unnoticed until a change in the environment started killing the rest of the creatures off. The ones with the variant characteristic gained a survival advantage, but no actual change occurred. Natural Selection in essence has little to nothing to do with evolution.

    3. Re: And duplicated as well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Genes being duplicated to form multiple body parts along the body is actually pretty basic, it basically involves a mutation of the gene being inserted along the homeobox chain, or repeated multiple times,
      It is a fundamental feature of evolution in fact; just look at the variety of segment counts and appendages in Arthropoda, or differing numbers of fins and fun rays in various fish species.
      It just is t so apparent in tetrapods because we maintain a fairly similar bauplan, but the same principle does apply to vertebrae counts, digits, numbers of teeth, etc.
      Limbs came from gills because gills are the part of the fish which have to be bony and rigid (early fish could get away with the rest of the body being cartilaginous) and gills also needed reticulation. according to the research at some point this feature jumped to locations of swimming fins, making them bony rather than just cartilaginous or adipos extensions, and further down the line the bony fins were able to adapt to land by thickening and changing shape.
      Similar to how teeth developed from scales.

    4. Re:And duplicated as well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe the original creatures had two sets if gills and as the water became more oxygenated one set was enough. So creatures with a mutated set of gills didn't always die out and eventually they mutated something useful.

    5. Re:And duplicated as well by jawtheshark · · Score: 1

      Just in case you don't know. Recapitulation theory ("ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny") has been largely discredited.

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
  24. I Have To Call BS On This by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If human limbs evolved from the gills of sharks, how come we don't have lasers growing out of our heads?

  25. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And thus did grad students lose the right to name things that they discovered.

  26. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

    FFS. Just no. NO.

    Yep!

    Someone discovered a gene and called it "hedgehog" because it made fly larvae look like mini hedgehogs. Then someone discovered another variety and the form X hedgehog was born. Then someone who grew up in the 80s found a variety and thought it would be a good wheeze to make X=Sonic.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  27. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh man, that's just the tip of the iceberg, the Drosophila genetics community had a fun time naming their genes. Here are some examples:

    I'm not dead yet
    Bride of Sevenless
    Ken and Barbie
    Cheap Date
    Lush
    Spook
    Spookier
    Shadow
    Shade
    18 Wheeler
    Tin Man

  28. There's an obesity gene named after McDonalds by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    No I just made that up. But San Francisco voters did try to name a sewage treatment plant after GWB.

    What gene would you name after trump?

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:There's an obesity gene named after McDonalds by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Sonic the Hedgehog Hair gene

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    2. Re:There's an obesity gene named after McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No I just made that up. But San Francisco voters did try to name a sewage treatment plant after GWB.

      What gene would you name after trump?

      The "upsets delicate flowers in their safe spaces" gene?

      And we have located the Hillary! gene.

  29. Sharknado 4 plot? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Is this part of the Sharknado 4 plot?

  30. 138 years ago? by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

    Whoa, you mean the creationists were right?

    1. Re:138 years ago? by SeaFox · · Score: 2

      The theory is what was suggested 138 years ago. It wasn't suggested the evolutionary change itself occurred then.
      Don't worry. I had to read that part twice, too.

    2. Re:138 years ago? by I'm+not+god+any+more · · Score: 1

      The new discovery backs up a 138 year old theory that legs and arms evolved from prehistoric fish gills.
      FTFY

    3. Re:138 years ago? by OS2toMAC · · Score: 1

      You know, a couple of commas would have made that much easier,,,

      "The new discovery backs up a theory, suggested 138 years ago, that legs and arms evolved from prehistoric fish gills."

      See?

    4. Re:138 years ago? by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      Make sure you file that comment with the submitter. I, on the other hand, know how to use commas.

  31. Thanks To Sonic The Hedgehog Game by snowsmann · · Score: 2

    Did anyone else read that as "Human Limbs Evolved From Shark Fins Thanks To Sonic The Hedgehog Game" at first? I was trying to figure out how playing the Sega game would change shark fins into human limbs...

    --
    timeo Danaos, et dona ferentis
    1. Re: Thanks To Sonic The Hedgehog Game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, how are they supposed to push the buttons with fins?
      Duh! Evolution!
      See? It all makes sense.

  32. Bad summary by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 5, Informative

    A very bad summary. That's what they get for using the Daily Mirror as if anything they published were actually science journalism.

    The proposed evolution is from gills, not from fins. And even here, it's the gill arch: not the gills, but the cartilage supporting the gills

    Sharks have nothing to do with it-- the fish in question are skates, not sharks, and even here, they aren't proposing that limbs evolved from skate gill arches, but from the gill arches of proto-fishes who were ancestral to both.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  33. A corrections is needed - about 138 million by jonbenson · · Score: 1

    I hope someone corrects that post to read 138 million years ago and not 138 years ago. I don't think we just got our legs and arms in 1878.

    1. Re:A corrections is needed - about 138 million by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      I don't think the theory was suggested 138 million years ago.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    2. Re:A corrections is needed - about 138 million by I4ko · · Score: 1

      It could have been...by the sharks... they just didn't record it. Perhaps one of their mad scientist decided to experiment with eugenics, the experiment went sideways and.. humans are the result.

    3. Re:A corrections is needed - about 138 million by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, duh! how could they right it down, they hadn't developed hands yet sheesh!

  34. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by HiChris! · · Score: 1

    Umm.. you missed the part where they called a protein a gene.

  35. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot is always reposting news from the shittiest sites. Mirror, RT, Bloomberg, etc.

  36. Jesus, try being a bit wronger, why don't you? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

    Human Limbs Evolved From Shark Fins

    Scientists believe human limbs evolved from the gills of sharks

    Fins, gills, same thing right?

    Second thing: we're not descended from sharks.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  37. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Geny McGeneface!

  38. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    good point!

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  39. Re:NO --- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, your god is a fraud. In accordance to the gospel of Hubbard, 75 million years ago Xenu flew us into a volcano in a bunch of DC8s... (insert additional illicit substance induced rant passed off as religious text and sold for a very handsome profit.)

  40. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    zomg sanic ftw lel!

  41. it's not April First any more, guys. by swschrad · · Score: 1

    stop posting beer talk.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  42. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... This protein is named after a 1990s Italian TV character that would video-bomb various shows by hitting himself in the nuts with a plastic bottle. So, be glad it's "just" Sonic.

    --
    Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
  43. Re:Bad summary Sharks have nothing to do with it-- by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    They weren't proto fishes back then, they were full fishes. Fishes go all the way down to the craniates which have no spine, only a skull (hagfish), and including the jawless fish (of which lampreys remain). The jawed fishes were full fish before the cartilaginout/bony split.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  44. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by OakDragon · · Score: 2

    You're just jealous because you didn't get to name it the Q*bert gene.

    @!#?@!

    --
    Dark Reflection
  45. Re: a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog g by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now that's funny!

  46. "Science" "Journalism" by nmoore · · Score: 1
    Let's apply the Daily Mail's science journalism standards to other topics:
  47. primordial soup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's make some.
    Should be pretty easy to create life from rocks, eh?

  48. Check your facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, human limbs didn't evolve from shark's or skate's fins, gills or whatever, because humans didn't evolve from sharks and skates. Sharks and skates are NOT in our line of ancestry.

  49. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It'll also linked with autism. Coincidence? I think not.
    https://www.google.com/search?q=sonic+hedgehog+autism

  50. We "evolved" from *Fish* ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fish. Not monkeys after all. Actually, Now, should I pause to reflect on some of the odors I encountered in my old somewhat libertarian sexual days , I can believe it...
    Except, of course, that we didn't directly evolve from apes at all. That 'privelege' would belong to the true humans instead, like the cro-magnon and neanderthal, and today's sasquatch. *We* were, otoh, totally biologically engineered from something probably closer to the common hairless zeta alien. Assuming that the whole concept of natural selection is legitimate, and it certainly appears to be, nature would NEVER have evolved a species as unsuitable for life on earth as we are ... The evidence is pretty much incontrovertible. Even the Bible states as much, using genetic material from "Adam's rib" ..Rib marrow, of course, being well known as the very best source of the needed cells...
      Now who, or why, or when, is for philosophers to argue.. not me.

  51. Get your facts straight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're confused: "a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog gene'" is nonsense. Genes CODE for proteins. They AREN'T proteins. They are DNA.

  52. Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    Do you not understand how Slashdot functions? USERS submit stories from other sites, the submissions are upvoted, and eventually brought to the front page. If you think something else should be on Slashdot's homepage, SUBMIT IT.

    https://slashdot.org/submissio...

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?