“Artificial Selection has resulted in plants that are more disease-resistant, cows that produce more milk, and racehorses that run faster (REALLY!?). One must wonder what will come next. In the blog entry, answer the following question: under what circumstances should humans be artificially selecting plants or animals, if any.”
What an unexpected surprise; It seems as if I have a problem with this question as well. Another unexpected surprise is that the internet is rife with humor related to the subject. I intend to utilise such a precious resource. Wait, is "utilise" spelled with an 'S' or a 'Z'? The dictionary says that both are correct...
What an unexpected surprise; It seems as if I have a problem with this question as well. Another unexpected surprise is that the internet is rife with humor related to the subject. I intend to utilise such a precious resource. Wait, is "utilise" spelled with an 'S' or a 'Z'? The dictionary says that both are correct...
(rolls eyes)
Firstly, I need to clarify the term “artificial selection”. To me, natural selection is when species are selected based on traits which are seen as beneficial. Whether they are selected due to the process of survival or because of human intervention is irrelevant. For thousands of years, species have been chosen for desired traits. Reproduction has always depended on the display of positive traits, such as good hunting skills or signs of fertility. This is no different with humans. We select each other, and various plants and animals based on specific traits: Horses for strength, pigs for plumpness, or otherwise. To put it simply, I believe natural selection to be the method by which species are selected based on positive traits. Artificial selection, in my opinion, is when selection is carried out at random, with no specific traits in mind. Like that big wheel in “The Price is Right” – you never know what you’re going to get. The fact that we now use genetic engineering to proliferate traits which we want in plants and animals simply means we have less of a genetic “cornucopia” to choose from (which is a good thing). This isn’t REALLY a problem: I just have a pet peeve with the term “artificial selection”. I feel it to be inaccurate.
Does that.. really change anything at all?
Nope. Not a thing -but here's another picture!
Firstly, I need to clarify the term “artificial selection”. To me, natural selection is when species are selected based on traits which are seen as beneficial. Whether they are selected due to the process of survival or because of human intervention is irrelevant. For thousands of years, species have been chosen for desired traits. Reproduction has always depended on the display of positive traits, such as good hunting skills or signs of fertility. This is no different with humans. We select each other, and various plants and animals based on specific traits: Horses for strength, pigs for plumpness, or otherwise. To put it simply, I believe natural selection to be the method by which species are selected based on positive traits. Artificial selection, in my opinion, is when selection is carried out at random, with no specific traits in mind. Like that big wheel in “The Price is Right” – you never know what you’re going to get. The fact that we now use genetic engineering to proliferate traits which we want in plants and animals simply means we have less of a genetic “cornucopia” to choose from (which is a good thing). This isn’t REALLY a problem: I just have a pet peeve with the term “artificial selection”. I feel it to be inaccurate.
Does that.. really change anything at all?
Nope. Not a thing -but here's another picture!
Anyway, let’s move on to the actual blog topic, shall we? Under what circumstances should humans be selecting plants and animals? Aside from the fact that they have already been doing this for as long as there have been humans (and maybe before), I believe that if it helps humanity, and has no repercussions, then why not do it? If God didn’t want us messing with genes, there’d be an eleventh commandment. I know that’s not really a good excuse, but it’s religious enough to stop overzealous pious types. And really... aren’t those the only people that have a problem with any good idea. Although I must say I understand their way of thinking: “This is way too good to not be bad”.
Hey, that’s a little bit offensive there, bud.
Hard to defend myself and present my opinion without speaking my mind. Sorry. Also hard, when given a prime opportunity, to not show another picture.
....
Hey, that’s a little bit offensive there, bud.
Hard to defend myself and present my opinion without speaking my mind. Sorry. Also hard, when given a prime opportunity, to not show another picture.
....
Oh, this just in. It appears I was right about artificial selection. “It should be emphasized that there is no real difference in the genetic processes underlying artificial and natural selection, and that the concept of artificial selection was used by Charles Darwin as an illustration of the wider process of natural selection” (Statemaster Encyclopedia > Natural Selection) We now have the term “unnatural selection” to better describe this phenomenon. WHAM. BAM. ALAKAZAM!
Alright, I’ll give you that one. Are we done?
Almost. I just want to summarise, and say that humans should (continue to) select plants and animals, because doing so is a natural human process, and because it is for the benefit of mankind. And I would like to continue eating orange carrots. Yea. Look it up. Natural, human selection at work, baby.
Oh, wow. Can you tell me more about it?
No. I’m trying to keep this short, and more importantly I am not here to teach you. Opinion presented = Done.
Seems like you're just lazy.
Lazy is not responding to that claim. Lazy is not posting the best pic of all
No im not.
Alright, I’ll give you that one. Are we done?
Almost. I just want to summarise, and say that humans should (continue to) select plants and animals, because doing so is a natural human process, and because it is for the benefit of mankind. And I would like to continue eating orange carrots. Yea. Look it up. Natural, human selection at work, baby.
Oh, wow. Can you tell me more about it?
No. I’m trying to keep this short, and more importantly I am not here to teach you. Opinion presented = Done.
Seems like you're just lazy.
Lazy is not responding to that claim. Lazy is not posting the best pic of all
No im not.
And here you go.
whatever.
Yea. Well I know you SEEM angry, but you'll be back. I think it's Unit 12 or something
-see ya
Sources:
http://www.anthro.polomar.edu/
http://library.thinkquest.org/C0118084/Gene/Genetic_variation/artificialselection.html
http://www.anthro.polomar.edu/
http://library.thinkquest.org/C0118084/Gene/Genetic_variation/artificialselection.html
excerpts of charles darwin's works
Picture Sources:
4 comments:
Nice blog, very personal and all in your opinion. Despite that I find it vague since you say that we should continue to artifically select. This thing can actually kill animals and if not harm them. Wait better yet cause extinction.
"Then God said,... and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth,b and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
I know this statement (source from Bible) seems like we have full authority, but since humans created the Bible, I'm pretty sure that God meant for us to take care of them.
Summing it up, i partially agree with you. We should keep continuing artificial selection as long as we keep in mind of the safety of other animals and plants
Hey Kyle great blog. I like the fact that you used your sense of humor to engage the reader and to keep their attention throughout the entire blog, while at the same time explaining exactly what artificial selection is and what your view points on it are. Your humor kept my attention as well as understand what you were trying to say about artificial selection. Good job !
Hey Kyle! Great blog! I also enjoyed the humor that you used through pictures and words to further engage your readers! I loved the idea that you had about the wheel of fortune "Wheel" being like artificial selection. It is very true that you won't know what mixture of DNA you will get with each artificially selected generation (or prize you will get on the wheel of fortune!)that was very clever!Although natural selection should be continued, I believe that artificial selection will benefit us in the future! Anyways, keep up the good work!
What up Kyle. Good blog, but I think you avoided the negatives of artificial selection a bit too much. The health of animals and plants is certainly affected by artificial selection and you didn't seem to touch on it.
For example, in my blog I discussed hip disease in dogs that can be passed on to dogs that may not normally get the disease, and that chickens bred to grow quickly and lay more eggs would gain too much weight or have a calcium deficiency.
However, I like your point about artificial selection not exactly being the most accurate term. I believe that it could be a term that would be better suited to the concept of designer babies, as that involves the direct manipulation of genes. Here, the process is still natural in the fact that it is more a controlled environment rather than direct manipulation of genes.
Overall, good blog.
Post a Comment