>>13521463>When biologists say that they are talking about junk DNA.No they are not. the majority bulk of your functional genes are for processes shared for all living things like the the krebs cycle, other metabolic pathways, etc. even non coding shouldn't be discarded because a lot of it is leftover pseudogenes.
>The genes responsible for phenotype as much more diverse and these aren't shared at alli think your definition of gene is different than mine. a gene is a sequence of nucleotides that codes for a certain protein, variations in snps within this sequence could lead to a different protein or no protein. when they refer to human genetic variations they refer to snps because no human has an entire gene not found in other humans. don't agree? name one gene found in one population and not the other
let's make this more simple. gene x codes for nose, snp variation found in different subpopulations in gene x make it bigger, smaller, uptruned, droopy, etc. no gene x means no nose
>Saying humans are genetically similar is just a socially constructed sound bite.this has nothing to do with politics. saying humans genes are different than each other because they look different but not doing the same for animals or plants species is anthropocentric and biased.
btw don't underestimate snps.
