Can't repopulate


I'm sure this has been said before but you can't really repopulate an entire species with two specimen.

Much like we didn't actually descend from Adam and Eve.

reply

the problem is brothers and sisters would have to ... yuck!

reply

[deleted]

incest for the win

but ha it beter than blu f @ c k i n g linda right

reply

Yeah, that's gonna be one awkward talk about the "birds and the bees"!!!

Would you like some hot coffee - in your face?!!! - Bert Macklin, FBI

reply

Just because Incest is wrong now, doesn't mean it wrong back then.

reply

Not about ibcest. the reason incest does not work is because it leads to genetic mutations. its estimated that there is a need of at minimum 10.000 units of any species to be alive in order to have chance of repopulation or the gene pool become too small and they cannot reproduce healthy offsprings with time.

---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

reply

You can try. ,)

I'm better than you.

reply

Sure, but Cleopatra's parents were brother and sister, as were her grandparents and great-grandparents. And they were humans. Inbreeding certainly happens with animals with limited populations. Doesn't mean we wanna see it in a movie though.

reply

Why not? What's wrong with incest?

"This isn't TV, it's real life. Can't you tell the difference?"
"Sure - I just like TV better."

reply


Just ask Lot
Oh GOOD!,my dog found the chainsaw

reply

Well, two birds mate and have babies.

Those two birds might have more babies.

Their babies will mate with each other.

Those babies with have more babies.


Wash, rinse, repeat.



With that in mind, Blu and Jewel saved their species.


Also, how the hell do you think our species has thrived. There has to have been a little incest when we first came to be.




--------------------------
New Siggy: Some people on IMDB whine just as bad as 2 yr olds.

reply

not necessarily ... that's only true if you believe in a strict interpretation of the bible (one man, one woman). if i had to hazard a guess, there were more people out there.

Why do we warn of spoilers, isn't that the chance you take going to a site like imdb?

reply

The first few generations would have high rate of genetic defects and thus be vulnerable, but assuming they survive ultimately natural selection would take over and cull the genetic defects from the species even with a starting population of 2.

reply

The main problem isn't moral, it's genetic. With only a population of two, you'll have an extremely large occurence of disease and hereditary diseases. You need a much larger population to make sure the genomes are different enough to not have the same genetic weaknesses. Normally a functioning alele of a gene will make up for a non-functioning one. Variation is good. It is also needed for the variation in our immune defense system neccesary to keep ahead of the bacteria and vira.

Although inbreeding has taken place, it is also a scientific fact that inbred populations, be they animal or human, have a much higher rate of genetic defects and disease. For example, many of the inbred royal families also had mental illnesses and various other ailments.

reply

For Pete's sake, everyone, this is a children's movie... Lighten up. 

reply

"Even" children should know about this. It's very basic knowledge. And even without the genetic knowledge they already know and understand that these birds must mate with their own family to reproduce.

reply