I Thought Everyone Already Knew This?

Mongrels are cleverer than pedigree dogs, according to research.

Hybrid vigour isn\’t it called?

It\’s one of those things that has always amused me about those who worry about "racial purity" in humans. The more the merrier for the pool your genes come from rather than being limited to a sub-group.

 

12 comments on “I Thought Everyone Already Knew This?

  1. “Mongrels are cleverer than pedigree dogs, according to research.”

    An insight which Daniel Defoe came to appreciate way back in 1701. Try his satirical poem: The True-born Englishman:
    http://www.luminarium.org/editions/trueborn.htm

    Thus from a mixture of all kinds began,
    That heterogeneous thing an Englishman;
    In eager rapes and furious lust begot,
    Betwixt a painted Briton and a Scot;
    Whose gendering offspring quickly learned to bow,
    And yoke their heifers to the Roman plough;
    From whence a mongrel half-bred race there came,
    With neither name nor nation, speech nor fame;
    In whose hot veins new mixtures quickly ran,
    Infused betwixt a Saxon and a Dane;
    While their rank daughters, to their parents just,
    Received all nations with promiscuous lust.
    This nauseous brood directly did contain
    The well-extracted brood of Englishmen.

  2. Well I knew that, it’s called heterosis (see story about descendants of those Mutiny on the Bounty chaps). It’s just the logical opposite result of the racial opposite of inbreeding.

  3. What is most amusing about said Racial Purists is that with very few exceptions, we are all mongrels, cousin marrying immigrants from the subcontinent excepted of course.

  4. On the basis of “hybrid vigour” we’re all screwed! I’m sure I read somewhere that we humans display remarkably little genetic difference and that there is more genetic variety in an average troop of Chimpanzees than the entire human race.

  5. “we humans display remarkably little genetic difference and that there is more genetic variety in an average troop of Chimpanzees than the entire human race.”

    There’s a reason as to why that could be so . .

    “With over 6 billion people living in the world today, human beings are a phenomenally successful animal. But our species, Homo sapiens, once came close to outright extinction.

    “Clues from genetics, archaeology and geology suggest our ancestors were nearly wiped out by one or more environmental catastrophes in the Late Pleistocene period. At one point, the numbers of modern humans living in the world may have dwindled to as few as 10,000 people.”
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/prehistoric_life/human/human_evolution/new_batch1.shtml

  6. The problem being, of course, that we do not know how, where or (to the nearest 100,000 years) when Homo sapiens first arose. However, the current thinking is that there were very few of them even when they left Africa (where they probably originated).

    We also do not know whether they were able to breed with near ancestors (such as H. erectus or Neanderthals). In fact, we know almost nothing certain about our origins.

    However, given the way in which species arise, it seems obvious that there will be a considerable Founder effect and our species has not been around long enough in order to produce a large number of mutations.

    I belive that the figure is something like 98.4% gene similarity across the entirety of the human race.

    DK

  7. When I go out shopping and the like or take stock of the scale of binge drinking in Britain, I’m sometimes inclined to think there was a lot more inter-breeding with the Neanderthals than we have been led to suppose.

  8. One aspect I always remark on during discussions of inter-racial marriages is that the offspring of mixed-race couples tend to be astoundingly good looking. Think Halle Berry, Thandie Newton, Tiger Woods, Kristin Kreuk, Samantha Mumba etc.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.