It is my estimation from the analysis of DNA and its structure that it is possible to choose the physical form of a person by modification of the junk DNA. It should have been obvious to me at the start when studying molecular genetics, but as I have related previously, we did the grad course in a single semester and HOX, the final chapter, was excluded and I didn't consider it at the time.
This is the foundation of my reasoning. The accumulation of mutation in "non-coding" regions implies to the scientists that it is not "conserved" or part of the organism. This is a fallacy. They are looking in a mechanistic way and implying that life is like a machine. This is the same fallacy of mind. It is holistic in infinite dimensions. It is the quantity and position that determines its effect and as such, it does not matter that the sequence of pairs has SNPs or inclusions, or deletions. It creates variety. In addition it IS conserved, not in its base sequence, but in the amount of DNA itself. Certainly if it had no purpose it could slough away a little each generation and the organism would duplicate with less expenditure of energy and thus have advantage. In single celled organism, when extra DNA is added and it is not integral to the survival it gets sloughed eventually (In my observation).
Nature takes chaos and manufactures life. It is the principle of universal use. Life is born in the universe and if it can develop a consistent life pattern on the nuclear decay of tritium, it will. So, what better material to make life than chaos itself.
I think I can prove this in the lab with lower organisms by altering the length and position of long repeats. It is also feasible to change the mechanism of the DNA to create a static instantiation (With less DNA) , if this is the case, but it would not evolve along the same path as others of its species. .I once asked a professor why they didn't do a knockout organism with "junk DNA" removed to prove that it is just that. I got the "It has been decided and is thus true look."( MY bad, and to be fair, I discovered this research and though is was a 3% knockout it may be the foundation to assume that it is useless DNA) and so it shouldn't be tested as everybody has agreed that they are right, that it does not code and therefore is nothing. Apparently they felt that saying it had been done would have been too much effort or they were not aware. They are taking Watson and Crick's language mistake about the DNA Central Dogma DNA→RNA→Protein way too seriously. α to Ω+1 In fact, retroviruses reverse this with "reverse transcriptase" and there are protein to DNA methods which are possible.
"My mind was, that a dogma was an idea for which there was no reasonable evidence. You see?!" And Crick gave a roar of delight. "I just didn't know what dogma meant. And I could just as well have called it the 'Central Hypothesis,' or — you know. Which is what I meant to say. Dogma was just a catch phrase."
Horace Freeland Judson records in The Eighth Day of Creation: "Chapter 6: My mind was, that a dogma was an idea for which there was no reasonable evidence. You see?!".
- The Eighth Day of Creation:[1]
- Horace Freeland Judson (1996).
- (25th anniversary edition).
- Cold Spring Harbor, NY:
- Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
- ISBN 0-87969-477-7.
- I ♥ these lists. As much as LaTex
- & ∂⌈Easter eggs⌉ that are deeply hidden.⇑
- For every 0x5f375a86.
- Newton's method.
- XKCD
- Wikipedia explanation
- A×B=x
- f(A,B)=x factorial
- An Ceiling Cat sayed, Beholdt, the Urfs, I has it, An I has not eated it.
- Horace Freeland Judson (1996).
A book about Watson and Crick.
Horace Freeland Judson (1996). The Eighth Day of Creation: Makers of the Revolution in Biology (25th anniversary edition). Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. ISBN 0-87969-477-7. An Ceiling Cat sayed, " Beholdt, the Urfs, I has it, An I has not eated it."
⌈cat c's u ⇒ is a joke, but it is too far a stretch, so I explain, The symbols around "catz" are ⌈⌈ ceiling and thus "Ceiling Cat" + "Seez" + "U".
0 comments:
Post a Comment