Balderdash (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-10-06 22:50 (#2T5D) The lead author sounds like a terrible person, purposely conflating insect reproduction with a implied human connection that completely doesn't exist. AW. Re: Balderdash (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2014-10-07 02:42 (#2T5K) The lead author sounds like a terrible person, purposely conflating insect reproduction with a implied human connectionWas there a specific quote you're referring to? She did specifically say: "But we don't know yet whether this applies to other species." Don't confuse the study authors for the journalist taking the story whichever direction they prefer. For an extreme example, the Guardian article on the same subject was one big estrogen-fueled rant about the journalist's previous boyfriends...http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/02/baby-looks-like-ex-researchhuman connection that completely doesn't exist.Just because a human connection hasn't yet been proven, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. This is just the first study establishing that the effect exists... Humans absolutely are known to be greatly affected by other epigenetic effects, as TFA and tanuki both mention. It may take decades to determine how significantly affected, if at all, humans are. Re: Balderdash (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-10-15 09:53 (#2TCE) Lack of evidence is not evidence.What I see a lack of here is actual evidence, beyond anecdotes, that this effect is a real thing.You are correct but many make the mistake of trying to prove something that does not actually exist based on anecdote rather than actual empirical evidence.My explanation, in humans the female tends to go back to their ex for a little booty from time to time. This is supported by genetic evidence and statistics that says something on the order of 15% of us, our fathers are not who we think that they are, because (Surprise) Mom cheated on Dad. If I inherited anything from my Mom's ex BF it was the tendency to speak directly to the elephant in the room.
Re: Balderdash (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2014-10-07 02:42 (#2T5K) The lead author sounds like a terrible person, purposely conflating insect reproduction with a implied human connectionWas there a specific quote you're referring to? She did specifically say: "But we don't know yet whether this applies to other species." Don't confuse the study authors for the journalist taking the story whichever direction they prefer. For an extreme example, the Guardian article on the same subject was one big estrogen-fueled rant about the journalist's previous boyfriends...http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/02/baby-looks-like-ex-researchhuman connection that completely doesn't exist.Just because a human connection hasn't yet been proven, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. This is just the first study establishing that the effect exists... Humans absolutely are known to be greatly affected by other epigenetic effects, as TFA and tanuki both mention. It may take decades to determine how significantly affected, if at all, humans are. Re: Balderdash (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-10-15 09:53 (#2TCE) Lack of evidence is not evidence.What I see a lack of here is actual evidence, beyond anecdotes, that this effect is a real thing.You are correct but many make the mistake of trying to prove something that does not actually exist based on anecdote rather than actual empirical evidence.My explanation, in humans the female tends to go back to their ex for a little booty from time to time. This is supported by genetic evidence and statistics that says something on the order of 15% of us, our fathers are not who we think that they are, because (Surprise) Mom cheated on Dad. If I inherited anything from my Mom's ex BF it was the tendency to speak directly to the elephant in the room.
Re: Balderdash (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-10-15 09:53 (#2TCE) Lack of evidence is not evidence.What I see a lack of here is actual evidence, beyond anecdotes, that this effect is a real thing.You are correct but many make the mistake of trying to prove something that does not actually exist based on anecdote rather than actual empirical evidence.My explanation, in humans the female tends to go back to their ex for a little booty from time to time. This is supported by genetic evidence and statistics that says something on the order of 15% of us, our fathers are not who we think that they are, because (Surprise) Mom cheated on Dad. If I inherited anything from my Mom's ex BF it was the tendency to speak directly to the elephant in the room.