GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-10 > 1192862644


From:
Subject: Re: [DNA] Response to genetic genealogists from authors of Oct.19thScience ...
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 23:44:04 -0700


I'm not sure I would call it a "coordinated move", but I agree that a
lot of journalists, politicians, social activists, educators,
religious leaders, & others of that ilk, seem to be extraordinarily
quick to discredit genetics, & especially population genetics. I
think that if I were to wear my "reductionist" cap, I would say that
the reasons for that are fairly simple & straightforward. *It makes
them nervous.* They often don't take the time to examine the
evidence, because they are convinced that their own social constructs
are "correct" & therefore all this science is a waste of time, effort
& expense. My own personal rule of thumb is that you can tell when
you are getting too close to a sacred cow when people start
vigorously shooing you away. The social constructs that have played a
large role in world order since the "Great Wars" (I & II) largely
discredited the science of population genetics as it was practiced in
the early parts of the 20th century. In that era, the nascent science
of population genetics was widely associated with eugenics & fascism.
Good deeds are quickly forgotten, but evil is remembered long, long
after it has passed. I still believe that in the minds of many,
population genetics on it's own merit is perceived as "evil" & any
growth in it's popularity, especially among the lay public, is
perceived as a sign that widespread racism is again rearing it's ugly
head. I believe that what Kim says is true, that her editor cut the
one positive paragraph, & I can't help but wonder whether her editor
is a scientist or a bureaucrat (or both?). Blatantly overt racists
issue public edicts on a daily basis with little notice, but when the
Nobel laureate scientist who discovered DNA makes a statement that it
universally construed as racist, it makes headlines. That's what's
making bureaucrats nervous. That's why so many indigenous groups have
refused to participate in the Genographic project. Like it or not,
socialism (in it's many guises) has become the dominant form of
government on our planet. The most basic tenet of socialism is that
we are all equal. To many people, the term equal means that we are
literally all the same, *especially* when it comes to DNA. Up to the
past 2-3 years, we heard a continuous mantra that we are 99%
identical when it comes to our DNA. As the genome project gains
momentum, a lot of studies are being published which suggest that is
a very questionable premise. It may be true that our codons are all
the same, but the other 95% (or so) of our so-called "junk" DNA may
vary from person to person & ethnic group to ethnic group far more
than anybody had previously imagined. There in lies the problem. If
we are all socially "equal", how can we be so different?

So here's my simple answer to that question. We don't have to be the
same to be equal. Every ancient indigenous group was a bonding of a
people to a land. As countless generations passed, the people that
occupied any given geographic area adapted to that area, literally &
figuratively. The changes in DNA that are responsible for
pigmentation, immune response, sensory regulation, social
interaction, digestion, body morphology, etc., etc., are a direct
result of being in those places & adapting to those environments.
Martin Luther King said that he envisioned a "color blind" world,
where nobody noticed the color of his neighbor's skin. I understand
the metaphor, but I don't think that you have to be "color blind" to
accept your neighbor. There is another way - celebrate diversity. It
is that diversity that unites us, in a very literal sense. Diversity
is the end result of our genome's quest for eternal life. No,
individuals do not live forever, but we are all the end result of
countless generations of adaptation. Entire ethnic groups have been
lost to history, but I believe that little parts of them still live
on in us. That said, it is incredibly important to remember the
lessons of the Neanderthal. They lived for almost 400,000 years, a
genuine human species, & *not us*. They are gone now. Whatever else
we would like to believe about our futures, we had better remember
that we are not immortal, either individually or as a species. "Hey,
hey mighty brontosaurus, think you've got a lesson for us, walking in
your footsteps..." (from a popular song of the 80's). Molecular
biology holds out the promise of heretofore unimaginable benefits to
humanity. It's clear that a lot of people "don't get it" yet.
There was a posting to this list just a couple of days ago about an
epigenetic study being conducted at Duke University that just may be
the beginning of a medication regimen that appears to be effective in
regulating gene expression. (just maybe the first step in "curing
cancer", as well as a host of other debilitating & devastating
diseases). It received scant attention from the list.We really are
standing at the threshold of a brave new world, & a lot of people
just can't see that yet. We must be zealous missionaries to spread
this gospel to the world. We must protect & defend this fledgling
science, & nurse it to fruition. It is the promise of the future.
Good luck to us all, Pat

> Is there a coordinated move afoot to discredit genetic genealogy
> and those
> of us engaged in it, and if so, who is behind it and why?

This thread: