Tokos wrote:My DNA is almost identical to Michaelangelo's DNA… but that tiny difference means a hell of a lot.
Not that much. Not only is upbringing also a factor, the truth is that even "great" humans and "blah" humans are extremely similar. We are one of the least diverse species on the planet by far.
This is nonsense and a huge fallacy. You're basically saying that, because incest is bad and a certain level of genetic diversity is good, that genetic diversity is automatically an unqualified bonus. There's no evidence for this - it's as much taking "incest is bad" to a logical extreme as "half-fish people would be good because it's genetic diversity".
Plus, mixing different DNA results, in the long run, in homogeneity.
I'm sorry, when did I mention incest? When did I say "Because incest is bad, genetic diversity is good."? Also, half-fish people would be genetically impossible. The offspring would be die.
Mixing DNA results in homogeneity? Not necessarily. Mixing genetic lines does not remove the existence of the various alleles.








You fail, I am "Right Handed"