logoalt Hacker News

MarkusQyesterday at 7:14 PM1 replyview on HN

More to the point, TFA is specifically addressing the issue (which is part of what makes it a big deal).

They aren't saying "we see these things now, so they must be good" but rather things like "we see these selected for from 9kya to 3kya, but from then to the present they were selected against"; they are specifically looking at how apparent selective pressures changed over time.

> the idea that things that "were selected for" in the past can be determined by evidence

When the evidence is a copious selection of ancient genomes, distributed over both space and time, they certainly can be.


Replies

taericyesterday at 7:21 PM

Apologies, I only meant my gripe with the comment I was responding to. Is why I put "as stated." I meant that to be that I was not arguing what I think they were messaging towards.

The callout on "evidence" I have there is that I meant that to only be present evidence. And again, I am not convinced it can't be done. It takes a lot of work. Which, the article is doing. But just saying that traits that helped you survive are typically retained, so by definition increase fitness, does not.