Father. Mother. Cosmos…

Advertisements
Photo by Stijn Dijkstra from Pexels

It was long thought that during an embryo’s first cell division, one spindle is responsible for segregating the embryo’s chromosomes into two cells. Scientists now show that there are actually two spindles, one for each set of parental chromosomes, meaning that the genetic information from each parent is kept apart throughout the first division. (1)

Molded in fire.

Opposites in constant war.

A cosmos in turmoil.

Look at that beautiful day.

There is a tornado behind it.

Father. Mother…

I can feel it…

How peaceful…

A universe in fire…

Deadly life…

Advertisements
Photo by Leo Cardelli from Pexels

A once-maligned genetic parasite may actually be essential for survival.

Mouse embryos need that genetic freeloader — a type of jumping gene causing mutations, or transposon, called LINE-1 — to continue developing past the two-cell stage, researchers reported in Cell.

Transposons certainly can hop into and break genes, and cells deploy numerous tools to prevent the jumping genes from making RNA and protein copies of themselves. But, in early development, LINE-1 is turned on nearly full blast, packing RNA into embryonic cells as well as “germline” cells, which later give rise to eggs and sperm.

To see what the jumping gene was doing in the cells, scientists used a short piece of RNA that could pair up with LINE-1 RNA and cause the transposon to be degraded, essentially turning off the jumping gene. (The researchers couldn’t simply remove LINE-1 from a cell; there are thousands of copies) Without LINE-1 RNA, embryonic stem cells stopped making more of themselves and mouse embryos failed to progress past the two-cell stage of development. (1)

Meet life.

In death.

Look into the ground you step upon.

For mother Earth, life and death were never important.

Live. Die. Be.

This is the essence of life.

Mutations that lead to cancer: A major argument against evolution?

Advertisements
DNA molecule (source: PublicDomain)

A research group has discovered a novel cancer-driving mutation in the vast non-coding regions of the human cancer genome, also known as the ‘dark matter’ of human cancer DNA. (1)

Not a surprising result. Something inherently in opposition with the basic premise of modern evolutionary theory (that mutations generate new functions which – if persisted – can effectively increase the survivability of the organism), but again, not surprising at all.

Science has for a long time postulated the obvious: Any process which is not well designed and executed results in errors. This is obvious in every aspect of modern science and in essence in every aspect of human life per se.
Problems in network hardware lead to network noise. Errors in the DNA sequence lead to deadly illnesses like cancer. Inconsistencies in management processes lead to financial errors. Gaps in the chain of command lead to wars being lost. Random errors in the working of a computer program leads to people… breaking up the computer.

Not even once has any person cried out “Thank God for the flaws in my DNA! I will adapt better!”. Not even once has anyone celebrated the errors in the computer program he is using or in the project he is participating.
And yet, modern biology wants you to believe that random errors in the DNA sequence – which by the way has inherent built-in mechanisms to prevent such errors (the whole DNA chain is double for that reason) – result in changes which in time could turn into objective benefits!

So to get this straight: You get a mutation (God forbid), with a miracle you stay alive (even though this mutation leads to cancer) and then… voila! The benefit starts to build among the population.

But this is more complicated than that! one could argue.

But your description is so simplistic that it is wrong! another could object.

Sure, you are right! I answer.

I keep the analysis simple in order to show the basic argument. If the analysis is made more elaborate (as some biologists have done) then the arguments against the basic evolutionary mechanisms would be overwhelming. Try to explain how the eye would slowly and gradually evolve and you will end up in complete chaos of assumptions and continuous “miracles” happening one after the other.

As in every case of modern science, the marketing exceeds the actual delivery.

Surely mutations play a role in the evolution of organisms. They are there after all, there is no doubt about that. Surely there is an evolutionary mechanism benefiting the organisms which adapt better to changes. Again this is obvious and evident – it would be evident even without any observation actually. And surely we have seen species adapt to changes in their environment (the adaptability of viruses to new drugs is one nice example).

But from that point to the point that we see the mutations as a major mechanism driving the evolution of life there is a great distance, with grave logical counter-arguments to deal with before you even reach the middle of the way. And even more, from that point to holding biology eligible for explaining life and casting religion useless, there is a gap so huge that reaches the levels of comical.

No, noise cannot generate new useful information.No, errors cannot produce something useful by ‘accident’.And even if they did, this would result in total failure (a.k.a. death).

So my dear fellow scientists, keep on searching for the truth. But keep your head down a little. Staying humble is not a disadvantage, but something to be proud of! Nature is not only about life, but also about death. Death which may eventually lead to life as you have never before imagines. And perhaps right there where you see weakness, you may discover strength…

Killing humans. By analyzing rocks. [Brake that rock!]

Advertisements

University of California, Berkeley neuroscientists have tracked the progress of a thought through the brain, showing clearly how the prefrontal cortex at the front of the brain coordinates activity to help us act in response to a perception.

Recording the electrical activity of neurons directly from the surface of the brain, the scientists found that for a simple task, such as repeating a word presented visually or aurally, the visual and auditory cortexes reacted first to perceive the word. The prefrontal cortex then kicked in to interpret the meaning, followed by activation of the motor cortex in preparation for a response. During the half-second between stimulus and response, the prefrontal cortex remained active to coordinate all the other brain areas. (1)

In another research, scientists have unveiled incredible images of how the DNA code is read and interpreted – revealing new detail about one of the fundamental processes of life. Scientists at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, captured images of molecular machinery called RNA Polymerase III in the act of transcribing a gene in exquisite and unprecedented detail. (2)

We apply human-related words to lifeless matter and we believe that this actually means something. The cortex “reacts”, the cortex “interprets”, the cortex “prepares a response”, cells “read” the DNA…

We have created a universe with no humans inside, where only “objects” exist. And then we have given to these objects life. We have not only excommunicated our soul from the universe. We have trapped it inside rocks…

The only way out is to break that rock.

To analyze everything and see for ourselves.

To search deep inside until we see everything.

And only then will we see…

That we are inside that rock…

Editing DNA vs. Evolution. Change vs. One. A battle lost before it even starts.

Advertisements

Octopus, squid, and cuttlefish are famous for engaging in complex behavior, from unlocking an aquarium tank and escaping to instantaneous skin camouflage to hide from predators. A new study suggests their evolutionary path to neural sophistication includes a novel mechanism: Prolific RNA editing at the expense of evolution in their genomic DNA.

Continue reading “Editing DNA vs. Evolution. Change vs. One. A battle lost before it even starts.”