At what point do you stop believing in Santa Clause? Or the tooth fairy? Can’t you realize that there is something drastically wrong at a worldwide level for this this type of behavior to call it a belief system, it has been going on for to long now? Logic or science doesn’t make a dent, it has reached a level of total stupidity. Do a computer search on Behavior patterns and genes. The shoe fits.I don't buy the "it's all in the genes" bit. The first argument that comes to mind is, if genes control things to that extent, how is it possible for identical twins to have different behaviors or beliefs? Got me. I don’t know. Good question. But it is just not just the genes. It is also a combination of wanting to live forever and having an answer for everything (or a god that does). I suspect the gene has influence and not any controls. For example, my thinking on religion has changed a lot. Mainly due to the study of history and education. This gene research is amazing. It should not be overlooked. And how does this gene thing apply to other living beings, which seem to do quite well without God. But then the *mirror function* is evident and may be fundamental to empathic behavior. Does everything have a mirror neural network instruction in their genes?
From "can't you realize" and "the shoe fits" to "I don't know" and "It is also a combination..." in just two posts. Quite the turn around there Mike.Nothing has changed in my thoughts. Gene and stem cell are items I am trying to learn more about. Pretty exciting subject, the gene and what it can do. I am really busy right now and don’t have time to look into the twin question. But, I can tell you, if the twins were boy and girl. There is a lot of differences caused by genes. I have been amazed by dogs and other animals in how they act. It is like their brains are pre-programmed from birth to know certain things and act certain ways. I have always wondered how that data was transferred at conception. It seemed like too much data to be transferred. Now I am beginning to understand the genes are transfer device and the stem cells are the key.
From "can't you realize" and "the shoe fits" to "I don't know" and "It is also a combination..." in just two posts. Quite the turn around there Mike.Nothing has changed in my thoughts. Gene and stem cell are items I am trying to learn more about. Pretty exciting subject, the gene and what it can do. I am really busy right now and don’t have time to look into the twin question. But, I can tell you, if the twins were boy and girl. There is a lot of differences caused by genes. I have been amazed by dogs and other animals in how they act. It is like their brains are pre-programmed from birth to know certain things and act certain ways. I have always wondered how that data was transferred at conception. It seemed like too much data to be transferred. Now I am beginning to understand the genes are transfer device and the stem cells are the key. Exactly how would you "look into the twin question", if you had time?
At what point do you stop believing in Santa Clause? Or the tooth fairy? Can’t you realize that there is something drastically wrong at a worldwide level for this this type of behavior to call it a belief system, it has been going on for to long now? Logic or science doesn’t make a dent, it has reached a level of total stupidity. Do a computer search on Behavior patterns and genes. The shoe fits.I don't buy the "it's all in the genes" bit. The first argument that comes to mind is, if genes control things to that extent, how is it possible for identical twins to have different behaviors or beliefs? Got me. I don’t know. Good question. But it is just not just the genes. It is also a combination of wanting to live forever and having an answer for everything (or a god that does). I suspect the gene has influence and not any controls. For example, my thinking on religion has changed a lot. Mainly due to the study of history and education. This gene research is amazing. It should not be overlooked. And how does this gene thing apply to other living beings, which seem to do quite well without God. But then the *mirror function* is evident and may be fundamental to empathic behavior. Does everything have a mirror neural network instruction in their genes? You’re five levels above me right now. I need to catch up. Been getting freezing nights and I am busy keeping the field pipes from freezing. What got me on to this thinking was the results of the domestication project with the chicken. There have not been any domestication projects to speak of because it can take years and years to get results. This project has been going on now for 50 years. What they found was that the accepted mutation rate did not fit the accepted science. They had three mutations in the first 50 years. They should have had none. Any scientist will tell you that man being domesticated 8,000 years ago would be impossible because of mutations can take a long time and sometimes millions of years. Now what they are finding is that they really don’t have any scientific studies to back up their claims on how the mutations and genes evolve, except for wild animals. And with wild animals they can see the changes happening over very long periods of time. Point being this now puts into question one of the hurdles for man being domesticated. Another point is, this is a very new science. We will be asking questions that can’t be answered at this time.
From "can't you realize" and "the shoe fits" to "I don't know" and "It is also a combination..." in just two posts. Quite the turn around there Mike.Nothing has changed in my thoughts. Gene and stem cell are items I am trying to learn more about. Pretty exciting subject, the gene and what it can do. I am really busy right now and don’t have time to look into the twin question. But, I can tell you, if the twins were boy and girl. There is a lot of differences caused by genes. I have been amazed by dogs and other animals in how they act. It is like their brains are pre-programmed from birth to know certain things and act certain ways. I have always wondered how that data was transferred at conception. It seemed like too much data to be transferred. Now I am beginning to understand the genes are transfer device and the stem cells are the key. Exactly how would you "look into the twin question", if you had time? The subject matter is genes. I would want to know if the twins’ genes are identical. Then the big question would be. If they do have identical genes, are the switches on the genes matching? My understanding right now is that you can have the same gene, but what, how and when the gene reacts is controlled by switches in the genes.
At what point do you stop believing in Santa Clause? Or the tooth fairy? Can’t you realize that there is something drastically wrong at a worldwide level for this this type of behavior to call it a belief system, it has been going on for to long now? Logic or science doesn’t make a dent, it has reached a level of total stupidity. Do a computer search on Behavior patterns and genes. The shoe fits.I don't buy the "it's all in the genes" bit. The first argument that comes to mind is, if genes control things to that extent, how is it possible for identical twins to have different behaviors or beliefs? Because environment plays a part, too, and even identical twins don't have exactly the same environment and experiences, even if their parents swear they have or had. Either could also have mutated genes. They could also have brain anomalies that would affect their thinking. One could have been deprived of oxygen ever so slightly, which would cause different behavior. I know identical twins who chose completely different career paths. One is a Medical doctor and the other is a dancer and actress. Neither would want the other's career. They are as different as two sisters can be on many levels. Good points. When a show is on TV about twins, I have always found it interesting.
The subject matter is genes. I would want to know if the twins’ genes are identical. Then the big question would be. If they do have identical genes, are the switches on the genes matching? My understanding right now is that you can have the same gene, but what, how and when the gene reacts is controlled by switches in the genes.And why would anyone think you have something to offer to genetics and biology? You barely have a grasp on the topic, but you say you are on to some sort of theory. I would focus on your freezing pipes if I was you.
At what point do you stop believing in Santa Clause? Or the tooth fairy? Can’t you realize that there is something drastically wrong at a worldwide level for this this type of behavior to call it a belief system, it has been going on for to long now? Logic or science doesn’t make a dent, it has reached a level of total stupidity. Do a computer search on Behavior patterns and genes. The shoe fits.I don't buy the "it's all in the genes" bit. The first argument that comes to mind is, if genes control things to that extent, how is it possible for identical twins to have different behaviors or beliefs? Got me. I don’t know. Good question. But it is just not just the genes. It is also a combination of wanting to live forever and having an answer for everything (or a god that does). I suspect the gene has influence and not any controls. For example, my thinking on religion has changed a lot. Mainly due to the study of history and education. This gene research is amazing. It should not be overlooked. And how does this gene thing apply to other living beings, which seem to do quite well without God. But then the *mirror function* is evident and may be fundamental to empathic behavior. Does everything have a mirror neural network instruction in their genes? You’re five levels above me right now. I need to catch up. Been getting freezing nights and I am busy keeping the field pipes from freezing. What got me on to this thinking was the results of the domestication project with the chicken. There have not been any domestication projects to speak of because it can take years and years to get results. This project has been going on now for 50 years. What they found was that the accepted mutation rate did not fit the accepted science. They had three mutations in the first 50 years. They should have had none. Any scientist will tell you that man being domesticated 8,000 years ago would be impossible because of mutations can take a long time and sometimes millions of years. Now what they are finding is that they really don’t have any scientific studies to back up their claims on how the mutations and genes evolve, except for wild animals. And with wild animals they can see the changes happening over very long periods of time. Point being this now puts into question one of the hurdles for man being domesticated. Another point is, this is a very new science. We will be asking questions that can’t be answered at this time. Perhaps the problem lies in the term *mutation*. As I understand it mutation is usuaually caused by accident and usually is fatal to the survival of the organism. OTOH, *evolution* is a gradual process of small changes which can be beneficial or detriental to survival. A grey haired mouse may do well on rocky ground but not in sand. A sand haired mouse may do better in the desert than a greay mouse. These mice could be from the same litter but are naturally selected by escaping attention, depending on their environment. I believe that genes have many dormant parts, left-overs from ancient genetic traits, no longer functional, but may on occasion become active and create throw-backs to earlier physical functional traits. Is that not one of the dangers of in-breeding? Recessive genes?
Perhaps the problem lies in the term *mutation*. As I understand it mutation is usuaually caused by accident and usually is fatal to the survival of the organism. OTOH, *evolution* is a gradual process of small changes which can be beneficial or detriental to survival. A grey haired mouse may do well on rocky ground but not in sand. A sand haired mouse may do better in the desert than a greay mouse. These mice could be from the same litter but are naturally selected by escaping attention, depending on their environment.No, most mutations cause no problems at all. Some are favorable under the current circumstances, some are neutral, and some are maladaptive. Of course, as you pointed out, if circumstances change, a previously maladaptive mutation may become favorable.
The subject matter is genes. I would want to know if the twins’ genes are identical. Then the big question would be. If they do have identical genes, are the switches on the genes matching? My understanding right now is that you can have the same gene, but what, how and when the gene reacts is controlled by switches in the genes.And why would anyone think you have something to offer to genetics and biology? You barely have a grasp on the topic, but you say you are on to some sort of theory. I would focus on your freezing pipes if I was you. Lausten, you need to come out of the freezer, you have been in there too long. Checking the news this morning. Under the subject of Archaeology news was a story from an ID web site. I was wondering what in gods good name could they be blabbering about to get in the top stories of the day? It seems that ID thinking has evolved to the point that ID works in this manner. Intelligent is the key for everything. And material matter like cells and DNA are mechanical items that this intelligent uses. How it got into or control of our DNA is a biological phenomenon of the translating of immaterial thought into material reality. This was to have originally to have happened during the Cambrian explosion of life. How this was to happen, they say they simply don’t know. Point being, the religious block heads are already accepting that the DNA is where the science and the controls of life is and are creating theories to keep their ID thinking alive. We should be two step in front of them, not following. http://www.bing.com/news/apiclick.aspx?ref=BDIGeneric&aid=C98EA5B0842DBB9405BBF071E1DA7651077B1B5B&tid=B85EE3433E10413F9785D26E4BD3A3C8&url=http://www.evolutionnews.org/2015/11/more_on_the_mec100891.html&c=5SYrx9hv-wxcwMpIePWajkeTNj7618zkXgkPozGA1P8&mkt=en-us More on the "Mechanism" of Intelligent Design Ann Gauger November 14, 2015 3:56 AM | Permalink
Perhaps the problem lies in the term *mutation*. As I understand it mutation is usuaually caused by accident and usually is fatal to the survival of the organism. OTOH, *evolution* is a gradual process of small changes which can be beneficial or detriental to survival. A grey haired mouse may do well on rocky ground but not in sand. A sand haired mouse may do better in the desert than a greay mouse. These mice could be from the same litter but are naturally selected by escaping attention, depending on their environment. I believe that genes have many dormant parts, left-overs from ancient genetic traits, no longer functional, but may on occasion become active and create throw-backs to earlier physical functional traits. Is that not one of the dangers of in-breeding? Recessive genes?My thinking on how mutation works is evolution has changes all the time. But when enough changes have taken place a mutation happens. And this is why there are gaps in the species that the archaeologist find. Then what you are talking about is mutation of cell because they are being hit all the time by particles, thus causing mutations. These mutations rarely are the big jumps. And most don’t survive. But a few may. I think we are on the same page. I agree with what you are stating. As far as ancient genetic traits, the rice seed has much more DNA than man does. That is because it has been around much longer in time. But it uses much less DNA than man does. But the ancient DNA is still there and can be used if need. The switches just have to be turned on. There has been some stories by scientist that in theory they could create a dinosaur by controlling the switches in a chickens DNA.
You linked to a religious web site. Are you saying that is valid news? Are you saying that is valid science?
The subject matter is genes. I would want to know if the twins’ genes are identical. Then the big question would be. If they do have identical genes, are the switches on the genes matching? My understanding right now is that you can have the same gene, but what, how and when the gene reacts is controlled by switches in the genes.And why would anyone think you have something to offer to genetics and biology? You barely have a grasp on the topic, but you say you are on to some sort of theory. I would focus on your freezing pipes if I was you. Why do I have to do the offering? I am trying to learn by getting view points from different people. I can take care of the pipes and work on this project. You know there is no subject on earth that six weeks of intensive studying can't give you a full understanding of the subject. It won't make you an expert. But you should be able to have the basic understanding and the "how comes" of the subject. Religion is the exception. It makes no logical sense and does not fit any scientific molds. You can take six years and still not have the "how come's". With more books written and more experts on religion than on any other subject in the world. There is something awfully wrong. This gene subject may be the answer. The Intelligent Design people are already working in that area. You can keep reading all the books and listening to all the experts and even become an expert yourself on what all the other experts are saying. But if it doesn't fix the problem, what have you got? You must have heard of the broken hip socket happening to the women of Iceland a few years back. The expert's theories were that Iceland women would break their hip socket because they worked harder than other women in the world. Then along came the gene data. It turned out that most of the Iceland people are related and they traced the problem to one bad gene from one woman back in time. They fixed the gene and the broken hip problem is now fixed. Where are all the experts today on the working to hard theories? Are they still considered experts?
You linked to a religious web site. Are you saying that is valid news? Are you saying that is valid science?No, I am not saying is it valid science. What is said was that the story made headline news. And that it is looking like their science may be as good as the atheist’s science. Because there has been no science in the field of domestication. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise that domesticated animals do not follow the same evolution patterns as wild animals. Point being there has been a void in science in the domestication field that could explain major facts about history and the evolution of mankind.
I don’t count the website you linked as “made headlines”. Did you see the story somewhere else?
Mike, they can have identical genes, but different switches. I have seen identical twins where one has a devastating disease (like cancer) and the other does not. Just because they are identical twins, it does not mean they have identical lives with identical viral/bacterial injury exposures that can have a hand in turning on some of these ‘switches’.
I don't count the website you linked as "made headlines". Did you see the story somewhere else?Windows 10 has a screen that you can choose programs from. I open up news, and click on Top Stories. Right now the top stories are about what is going on in France. That is one of the first times I read something from an ID site. The ID junk is a waste of time.
Mike, they can have identical genes, but different switches. I have seen identical twins where one has a devastating disease (like cancer) and the other does not. Just because they are identical twins, it does not mean they have identical lives with identical viral/bacterial injury exposures that can have a hand in turning on some of these 'switches'.Thanks for the info. I think that cell research is going to take over as one of the top U.S. industries in the future. Totally amazing stuff these scientists are talking about.
I don't count the website you linked as "made headlines". Did you see the story somewhere else?Windows 10 has a screen that you can choose programs from. I open up news, and click on Top Stories. Right now the top stories are about what is going on in France. That is one of the first times I read something from an ID site. The ID junk is a waste of time. Alright so, "made headlines" means it came across whatever random news feed you happen to have in front of you. That is your typical Mike-centric way of looking at the world. And you were saying we have to "keep up with" these Christians, now you are saying it's a waste of time. Do you see why I think you are a waste of time?
And how does this gene thing apply to other living beings, which seem to do quite well without God.I see it as a paradox. There is no trace of gods in the Age of Domestication. So humans did just fine without gods over eight thousand years ago. Humans were religious, but without deities. So for two-hundred thousand years, no god, no problem. The paradox is that it is a human trait to want to know the answer to everything. The paradox is that mankind still wants to know the answer to everything. Except when it comes to deities. There seems to be a worldwide void about information on deities. There is nothing in the bible about the powers of God, who god is, where god came from, basically nothing about the powers that created everything. Nor is there any desire to find out. God does not fit into the standard human thinking pattern. It is like the human mind is blocked from all logical thinking when it comes to deities. God's power is the "word". No logic what so ever. Mankind becomes stupid when it comes to gods. I think it has to be a gene. What else could cause this worldwide stupidity? So to answer your question. Those that don’t have the gene problem, of course they should be find without a god. It should be next to impossible to convince them of a god. No different than the women of Iceland and the broken hip problem. Fix the gene, and no more broken hips. Think what that would do with religious terrorism? :lol: