From original post: "When an evolutionist finds that a gene has been changed, it is automatically assumed that mutation was involved. However, we have now recognized that some genes are hypervariable in comparison to others. Not all genes are variable. The sequence of housekeeping gene tend to remain constant, but interestingly, the genes involved with interspecies contact seem typically hypervariable."



Wow, that statement could be speaking volumes. If this is also relevant to inter-subspecies contact, then that could explain much. The Rosewell, only as one example, resulted from BCC/BCI contact. It'd be curious if the same (or similar) result would have occured if only BCC or BCI had been used. I could see that statement possibly being used as a defense/justification for interbreeding in the search for new/different designer snakes. (No offense intended, I am not suggesting that it needs justification or defending, only that this theory could support such an argument. And there have been enough posts in the forums to suggest the argument exists).



Mark


-----
uncommonboa.com

[ Hide Replies ]

• Genetic Anomilies/exceptions FOOD FOR - skyslinger, Sat Jan 17 22:20:27 2009
• RE: Genetic Anomilies/exceptions FOOD FOR - mpollard, Sun Jan 18 08:28:36 2009
• Mark, that grabbed my attention as well. - skyslinger, Mon Jan 19 10:49:38 2009
• RE: Genetic Anomilies/exceptions FOOD FOR - Warren_Booth, Sun Jan 18 10:14:35 2009
• Dr. Booth Please - LarM, Sun Jan 18 14:06:43 2009
• RE: Dr. Booth Please - Warren_Booth, Mon Jan 19 11:19:03 2009
• Thanks n/p - LarM, Mon Jan 19 12:27:02 2009
• Warren, while I thank you for your - skyslinger, Mon Jan 19 10:54:34 2009
• RE: Genetic Anomilies/exceptions FOOD FOR - Paul Hollander, Mon Jan 19 16:06:49 2009