Scientists Reveal Single Gene Is the Difference Between Humans and Apes

[Asrokhel]

Researchers believe that they have found the definitive difference between humans and other primates, and they think that the difference all comes down to a single gene.

What makes us human? Some say that it is the development of language, though others argue that animals have language as well. Some say that it is our ability to use tools, though many animals are able to use rocks and other objects as primitive tools. Some say that it is our ability to see death coming.

Now, researchers believe that they have found the definitive difference between humans and other primates, and they think that the difference all comes down to a single gene.

Researchers from the University of Edinburgh in Scotland attribute the split of humanity from apes to the gene miR-941. They say that the gene played an integral role in human development and contributed to humans' ability to use tools and learn languages.

Most of the time, when one species diverges from another, that difference occurs because of gene mutations, duplications, or deletions. However, this gene is believed to have emerged, fully functional, from "junk DNA" in a breathtakingly short amount of evolutionary time.

Humans share 96 percent of their genes with other primates. Of the 4 percent that humans alone have, a significant portion of it has been widely labeled "junk DNA". Researchers have since that "junk DNA" is functional, even though it does not code. This is the first time that a gene that humans and other primates do not share has been shown to actually have a specific function within the body.

Researchers came to this conclusion after comparing the human genome to 11 other species of mammals, including gorillas, chimpanzees, mice, and rats. These comparisons were made so that the geneticists could find the difference between them.

In a study published in Nature Communications, researchers say that the gene emerged sometime between six and one million years ago.

The gene is highly active in the regions of the brain that control language learning and decision making, indicating that it may play a significant role in the higher brain functions that make humans, well, human.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/articles/13227/20121121/scientists-reveal-single-gene-difference-between-humans.htm

[Dan~]

Doesn't suprise me. I always say at work "I get paid peanuts, so they get monkeys" so therefore I am a chimp, but drink my PG tips :)

[Yusuf M. Veteran]

It makes you wonder how that gene arose from junk DNA in such a short amount of time. It's truly remarkable.

[Asrokhel]

It makes you wonder how that gene arose from junk DNA in such a short amount of time. It's truly remarkable.

Well, my belief is that we [Homo sapiens sapiens] were genetically engineered.

[+Xinok Subscriber²]

It makes you wonder how that gene arose from junk DNA in such a short amount of time. It's truly remarkable.

It's better to think of it as noncoding DNA. It's possible that portions of this DNA were genes that synthesized proteins millions of years ago, meaning they underwent selective pressure and evolved. Then some event caused these genes to lose their function and become part of "junk DNA." Because they aren't coding for proteins, they no longer undergo selective pressure and can remain largely unchanged for millions of years. Finally, some event reactivates them and they're already fully functional because they evolved millions of years ago and simply remained dormant for all of that time.

[Luis Mazza]

I think this is only the tip of the iceberg, as there are too many differences to be carried out by only one gene. For instance: the aids virus does not affect apes, but it does heavily affect humans. It is not only about intelligence...

Conclusions like this are really worrisome because science funding is getting scarce and things are looking ugly. :|

Junk genes are as junk as the ignorance of the ones who give it's name.

[Asrokhel]

For instance: the aids virus does not affect apes, but it does heavily affect humans. It is not only about intelligence...

Actually, HIV started as SIV, before it jumped to us and became HIV/AIDS.

[ArialBlue]

Another kick in the balls to the religious crowd :3

[Detection]

Well, my belief is that we [Homo sapiens sapiens] were genetically engineered.

By who? The dumb animals? We are the most intelligent species and we're still learning GE

[Asrokhel]

By who? The dumb animals? We are the most intelligent species and we're still learning GE

I believe in advanced alien life, so guess who genetically engineered us!

[TPreston]

I believe in advanced alien life, so guess who genetically engineered us!

Kind of like a man that knocks up a girl and runs off ?

[redfish]

I believe in advanced alien life, so guess who genetically engineered us!

Who engineered the aliens? Who built the aliens' ancient monuments?

My belief is the ancient monuments of the aliens were built by even ancienter aliens, who engineered those ancient aliens, and those even ancienter aliens had monuments built by aliens that were even more ancient, and so on, iterating infinitely into even more ancient and ancienter aliens.

[Luis Mazza]

Actually, HIV started as SIV, before it jumped to us and became HIV/AIDS.

Yes, but even between monkeys there's a huge difference. How can it even be a single gene if there's a huge difference between the same species?

That's the point.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091205110306.htm

Who engineered the aliens? Who built the aliens' ancient monuments?

My belief is the ancient monuments of the aliens were built by even ancienter aliens, who engineered those ancient aliens, and those even ancienter aliens had monuments built by aliens that were even more ancient, and so on, iterating infinitely into even more ancient and ancienter aliens.

True... It's like saying that we were made by god, but actually just changing it's name.

To be looking for a "creator" is as dumb as being asked to be enslaved. It's actually a shame.

[Detection]

I believe in advanced alien life, so guess who genetically engineered us!

God! :p

[Noir Angel]

Another kick in the balls to the religious crowd :3

But evilution is a liberul conspirecy! we all know God created us with the dinosaurs 6,000 years ago! Anyone who says otherwise is a liberul commie terrorist that hates America!

:p

[redfish]

True... It's like saying that we were made by god, but actually just changing it's name.

Yea, which is why its strange that a lot of atheists that mock religion are attracted to ancient alien stories as credible.

For the record, a scientific explanation for the origin of things has the same problem, too... i.e. what caused the big bang? Eventually, someone will tell you a story about infinite universes being created in a froth of multiverses. What created the multiverses? (Personally, I think people simplify the religious view, its not meant as a scientific explanation for things)

[Noir Angel]

Until the believers also start taking logical hurdles as well with the "Everything must have a creator"... "Ok, so who created God?"... "God is above the rulez u fool!!" crap

[Detection]

Anyone who believes in Aliens but insults people who believe in God are actually the dumb ones, neither beliefs have any solid proof and to believe in Aliens requires a faith in something you can not see, only from stories and discoveries throughout history, exactly like God.

Do the Alien believers have an Alien Bible ?

[redfish]

Until the believers also start taking logical hurdles as well with the "Everything must have a creator"... "Ok, so who created God?"... "God is above the rulez u fool!!" crap

Thing is, in my view, 'God' is never meant as any kind of scientific answer to anything. Its just a way to personify the philosophical idea of a 'first cause'. People believe that there must be a first cause, religious people believe it can't be something material, physical, because anything physical or material can't be pre-existing, by any logical reasoning. Asking what created God is as pointless as asking what created the 'first cause'.

The problem is when people take 'God' too literally and don't understand its just a personification. And religious people do that too, a lot; take things way too literally. Which is a mistake on their part. But when atheists take it literally too, they're committing the same error, in my view.

[chconline Veteran]

Another kick in the balls to the religious crowd :3

If this assertion is valid, then religion would have been destroyed a long time ago when we found out we are 50-60% identical to bananas.

The two has no relevance in my opinion other than for people who have an unhealthy obsession to "kick religion in the balls" when anything comes up.

[Luis Mazza]

Anyone who believes in Aliens but insults people who believe in God are actually the dumb ones, neither beliefs have any solid proof and to believe in Aliens requires a faith in something you can not see, only from stories and discoveries throughout history, exactly like God.

Do the Alien believers have an Alien Bible ?

I don't believe in Alien crap. The bible is actually worse than believing in aliens because it tells you how to behave in the absurdity of rules from 2.000 years ago, which are actually not fully obeyed, because the ignorance and the wise side of us play together only to filter what the believer wants to believe or not.

It is a total nonsense that grows in generations...

[zeta_immersion]

quick someone manipulate some monkey dna and get them to talk ... cheap labour ...

these stupid governments and red tape ... who knows what we could have achieved by now through human dna manipulation

[+BeLGaRaTh Subscriber¹]

Is it Gene Simmons? He seems to be the missing link ....

[redfish]

because the ignorance and the wise side of us play together only to filter what the believer wants to believe or not.

Sounds like what most people do with science, too. People filter out what scientific evidence they don't like and only accept the evidence they do like. Which I see all the time. And that includes a lot of superstitious kind of beliefs, I see superstition passed off as science all the time.

There are two parts to major aspects to religious belief, anyway -- religious philosophy, and the stories, parables, etc., which are examples of the philosophy. The Bible is like literature, you have to separate the meaning from the details. And from what I've experienced, most people who are religious don't believe something just because their book says it, just like science evangelists don't believe something just because a textbook says it.

[TPreston]

Thing is, in my view, 'God' is never meant as any kind of scientific answer to anything. Its just a way to personify the philosophical idea of a 'first cause'. People believe that there must be a first cause, religious people believe it can't be something material, physical, because anything physical or material can't be pre-existing, by any logical reasoning. Asking what created God is as pointless as asking what created the 'first cause'.

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/special-pleading