cyber_indian

If there is any live form found in Stardust it will be "Archaea" ...

Getting the 3codons before ATG and the 3codons after the TGA, together makes uniquie indentifyer for every gene.

Can somebody explain me how is it possible to have on one hand "Natural selection", on the othrer hand knowing that every possible gene has it's "unique number" ?

Chicken. Anyway in that case I ask you not to waste our time on me, BUT let me discuss it the other who care to and don't be on my way.

What's the matter you too afraid to try it ? Just pick a gene give me the gene_index and we'll see. Why always it has to be aliens ??? If we go to another planet is resettling, but if it's somebody like us to resettle in our planet - it's "alien" P.S. There is a list of the genomes I have: http://www.cyber-indian.com/gene_index/downloaded.html

The whole idea is that genes are made on purpouse and "labled", so later can go exactly where we want them in the genome we want them - using gene_index as a "sticky ends". If genes did evolve (random mutations - came by itself) there is NO WAY they would have so strict unique labeling. About combination just compare 68 billion combinations with 40,000 human genes and different species having great percent of similarities. What's the connection to "gene therapy" ... that now you have mechanism how to put specific gene in specific spot without disturbing other genes and causing genetic diseases !

All I need you is to give me the (3 codons) 9 Nucleotides before ATG and 9 Nucleotides after TAG meaning the gene lpg0932 in genome NC_002942_5 have "AAAAAAAAA" after that is ATG and just after TGA is "ACTTTATGC". It would look like this "AAAAAAAAA ATGAGCATAGT ... TGGCGAAGTTTGA ACTTTATGC". The "AAAAAAAAAACTTTATGC" is the gene_index - you give me that I can give you the whole gene sequence you have picked. Now you have to remember that i have sequenced only the NCBI "Genome" Database and haven't sequenced any stanalone genes so far. Just give it a try.

Everyone the admin "Mokele" thinks can dictate the path of science !!! He thinks that nobody is intrested in what I have to say !!! "Mokele": Am I annoyed you wasted an enormous amount of space with two posts that were raw data? Yes. Raw data sets of large size are *not* simply given out, but are rather talked about in terms of the statistical analyses of them, due to the fact that nobody wants to wade through them all over again. "cyber_indian": This "raw data" has been requested as proof from the other users ... that's why it's called FORUM ... and it's supposed to be OPEN not DICTATED like "Spanish Inquisition" Talking about space and real stuff ... all that programing and analizing 3GB of ddata is waste for the admin Everybody I'm sorry, but the admin cut off the examples I gave and does not allow me even to put a link to my page ether because it's a spam and I'm not allowed to explain myself

I've Downloaded all genomes form http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ and made my own database and sequence all the genes in all genomes. I'm uploading a zip file with the whole gene_index sequence in my host. it consist of two files - the whole list and list with only the duplications of gene_index. http://www.cyber-indian.com/theory/doc/gene_index_list.zip How I found it - ever since I started thinking about my theory I was shure what direction to dig in and what to find - and if my theory was right I'll find it there - and every time it get's right.

Hi my name is Ivan Nanev and I'm writhing about what I've discovered proving further my theory and questioning the "evolution theory". I call it "Gene Index" - it's a UNIQUE marker for EVERY gene, meaning that every gene no matter what genome we are talking about is labeled. Meaning that my deploying theory is right and proves that we are not a result of random mutations or matching. The Gene_Index is consisted of the tree codons before the gene (xxx) and the tree codons after the gene (yyy), also called “sticky ends”. If for instance you give me the xxxyyy I can tell you with 100% accuracy the size of the gene, 100% accuracy the if it's going on the positive or the negative DNA strain and statistically 97.9% accurately return you the gene you are talking about and tell you in which genomes is also spotted. Further today or tomorrow I’ll make SQL query page available to the web to explain this fenomenom. I'll be happy to give example to anybody ! More about my theory on: http://www.cyber-indian.com/theory/index.html

One storage will be fit with one unit (consisting of small number of closely working genes), of course you can't fit a whole genome. Because bacteria are small, we don't need to bother how many storage cells we can have. And because we can target the units (with the help of antigen/antibody) we don't bother that they are mixed up together. About "vertebrate gene" what we do is just put the most common gene and later after it's been deployed, the universal mechanism (for appending the genome and molding specie functionality - called natural selection) will fit the gene for specie's best shape and use. Visit my page for more updates: www.cyber-indian.com

You pretty much got it, can be said in your words too. But I prefer it like this: "In order to survive after the Earth is destroyed, we must find other suitable worlds and send out bacteria. These bacteria must be able to create a new biosphere suitable for the ecosystem that must be deployed by them, so our existence can continue in time and space." Those memory bacteria may not exist nowadays because there is not purpose of them anymore, but I don’t mean it can't be done. We also may not have enough understanding of genetics yet. Anyway it's like writing in assembler language - at first it might seems impossible, but once you master the subject it's mostly work than philosophy. And even having metabolic load as an obstacle - we can always go around it. About putting the entire ecosystem all together - what we do is catalogue all species and as you said "there is 17% differences between us and yeast" (as far as I also remember it was in percents close to what you said) we put only gene difference in that "memory pool". P.S. there is a little update: Scenario 1 - memory units: -A blueprint - all the life form's DNA of the previous world ecosystem gathered and reduced it to greatest common factors (example for that is vertebrates - head, body, arms/wings/fins, legs and tail), strategically planned and stored in bacteria as gene module (group of genes working together to fulfill a function) units. -A way to keep gene modules stored and suppressed until transplanted (memory bacteria doesn’t transcode these extra genes – probably condense that extra chromosome). -A transplanting tool – vector (virus). -And a way the transplanting tool to identify only the target specie and specific type of cell (antigen/antibody mechanism). At first bacteria secrets a blank virus (a virus with DNA for its own structure only), by infecting a memory bacterium it multiplies and charging itself with the designated gene modules and antigens (a process called “transduction”). Now because of the antigen/antibody mechanism the virus is targeted to fuse/append (new DNA information) only with a specific specie and tissue. Scenario 2 - prophage: -A blueprint - all the life form's DNA of the previous world ecosystem gathered and reduced it to greatest common factors (example for that is vertebrates - head, body, arms/wings/fins, legs and tail), strategically planned and stored in bacteria as gene module (group of genes working together to fulfill a function) units. -Prophage with attached gene modules in bacterium host. -A triggering factor for the phage (virus). -And a way the phage tool to identify only the target specie and specific type of cell (antigen/antibody mechanism).

I want to remind you that we're still verry primitive in genes knowledge. Genomes are like looking in the executable code of computer program and watering what all those munkey simbols means. But it doesn't mean one we cover that knowledge, we wouldn't be able to modify them or even add easily cluster by cluster. After all genomes do exactly as what they've been instructed as coumputer program does. It's a fact that if you count your cells and multiply that number by 10 you'll get the number of bacteria living inside and on you. And Archae does cover silmiliarity with both procariotes and eucariotes. Quote: Halobacteria can repair badly damaged DNA. "We have completely fragmented their DNA. ...And they can reassemble their entire chromosome and put it back into working order within several hours," says Adrienne Kish, a member of the research group studying Halobacteria at the University of Maryland. These Archaea can also survive extreme dryness, a hard vacuum, and of course, high salt concentrations. We are not the only ones to notice that Halobacteria could use these capabilities to survive in space. P.S. I'll update more at that link. http://www.cyber-indian.com/theory/index.html

Ok where was I ... First I what to say that I don't support any religious thoughts in my theory. Second, I do need to make a long more understandable version with some visualizations. But I don't understand which part of suspended or not interacting DNA or different chromatin and DNA polymerase (DNA duplication) you did not get. I sure there are couple of more ways to keep a extra DNA non-interacting. I do also support that the newly generated DNA will need a mechanism to arrange genes for the specie to be able to fit in it's environment, borrowed or final fitting genes that have been uploaded from the memory cells or other species ... which you might call gene drift and etc. And also you still try to change subject ... how about symbiotic bacteria ... for instance bacteria that interacts with the roots of plants? P.S. the my theory does state that the first living cells are the archaeas not the prokaryote bacteria.

OK Granny "Do you believe it's possible to replicate a genome by gene therapy processes ?", "If a an extra chromosome is encapsulated in modified chromatin so it can't get transcribed - do you think your natural selection is gonna mutate it ?", "B-cell (now we know already they doesn't fit your natural selection), glands (and every excreting cell), symbiotic cells they all extracurricular work and that's ok, but somehow it's not possible for genetically engineered genes to exist" ... now answer and don't change the subject or explain it with secular philosophy 200 years old or blackboxed demonstrations.

Hey, where is your argument ... I ask you a question or answer one, you always try to change the subject

If you don't have any argument please don't waste my time. Being a biologist explaing gene behavior is like a customer explaing to a mechanic how cars works. And black-boxing is just a way for daub and ignoring things not to explaing them. P.S. There is something that will intrugue you: http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2177

I don't think you answered my question about the genome replication >>True, and you are right, but I was mostly taking issue with your claim that the volcanoes themselves would vent oxygen (which you mentioned specifically as something given off by volcanoes, not as a product of the actions of autotrophs). As i wrote in the paper "After volcanoes has done their job, bacteria (autotrophic) takes over to convert inorganic minerals to organic nutrition and make sure further availability by recycling it (autotrophic and decomposers)" >>Extraterrestrial origin of life I would see it more like it as ancestors if the hypothesis is true. Do you see your parents as extraterrestrial to you or as ancestors ? >>Selection, on the other hand, *removes* diversity from the gene pool, acting in such a way that those random variants who reproduce the best become more common, supplanting those who do not. The only issue I have with natural selection is the current testability (on gene level) of the hypothesis (more like a scientific guess). >>You initially have lots of different B-cells, and every time they divide, they make errors that produce mutations that can result in new antibodies. B-Cell *are* programmed to memorize specific antibodies and after you get infected they divide again. And antibodies don't result from mutation, but from a very sophisticated immune mechanism. Anyway aren't the extra antibodies burden or not, and how come they don't turn into random genetic gibberish? I'm very curious how you gonna explain the MHC. Isn't it a burden for most of the cells that don't use it, especially bacteria and no CD4 viruses? BTW antibodies *are* burden. They don't serve B-cell no purpose, aren't they ? >>Mutation is more common than you think. Mutants as dwarf and etc. are diseases caused by vitamin or mineral malnutrition, carcinogens, especially not caring parents, why do you think most of the rich daughters are so good looking. If it was that common half of your body cells ware going to be defective and useless. >>Any extra DNA would be a burden on so simple an organism as a bacteria (note how little of their DNA is unused), and any bacteria that discarded this "memory store" would enjoy faster reproduction and lower nutrient requirements, which means natural selection will ensure that bacteria will out-compete those who retain the stores, eliminating them. >>Let's not forget that any "stored" DNA is subject to mutation (*and* that bacteria have a higher mutation rate than eukaryotes), so by the time the bacteria even could evolve into eukaryotic or multicellular life, all that would be left is the random genetic gibberish. All the information would be wiped out by accumulated mutations. Quote "A way to keep gene modules suppressed until transplanted (memory bacteria doesn’t transcode these extra genes – probably condense that extra chromosome)" Or maybe modified chromatin like new heterochromatin that gonna suspend "genetically inactivate"/"chromosomal deactivation" that way no interaction/transcription/mutation would be possible. If the approach is a new chromatin it means also a special DNA polymerase is needed. Another approach is modified nuclei to cut the extra chromosome from any interaction. How much will the burden or the metabolic load when that extra chromosome will not be expressed/interact in any way. I've read enough microbiology see that virtually anything is possible with genes. Just because there are sometimes obstacles doesn't mean it can't be done, if it wasn't that hard it would take one gene for one task to be done. All we need is imagination and more knowledge of genes. >>Evolution 101 Please. And *Can* we not change the subject and discuss the Thread.

microbiology text book keywords: Gene expression chromosomal activation or deactivation genetically inactive regulation of gene expression Heterochromatin

Do I understand that you are believe that replication of a genome is not possible through Gene therapy? Or are we changing the subject.

Considering that you have at least high school diploma you had gone through many tests and exams. Now tell me did you actually gave random answers to those exams and failed N numbers of times until you took those exams. Because that way you'll never graduate any school and the same is with random scrambling of DNA – natural selection. Or maybe you feel better person if actually life have started on earth, meaning that humans are first of a kind. That way ignoring any other possibilities. >>If you remove the antibiotics, some will (through mutation) lose their resistance, and be better off because they no longer have to waste energy making proteins they don't need. AFIK new and new antibiotics like - penicillin, methicillin, tetracycline, erythromycin, vancomycin are made because bacteria keeps building resistance. Then why B-cells keep memorized those burden antibodies - or maybe they've been programmed to keep this heavy burden. >>Yes, but what I am saying is "There is so reason to presume the current theory is *not* right, nor any compelling reason to seek its alteration." That's not saying "It is right", but rather "There is nothing to indicate that it is wrong or inadequate". >>Natural selection fits, it works, and it has been observed. >>!!! so by the time the bacteria even could evolve into eukaryotic or multicellular life, all that would be left is the random genetic gibberish. All the information would be wiped out by accumulated mutations! YOU yourself just proved that "natural selection" will ensure species extinction than survival and evolution. in fact it will ensure increase of mortal birth-rate, mutants and genetic diseases. NO COMMENT. >>While both of those *contain* oxygen, there's a world of difference between belching CO2 and SO2 into the air, compared to O2. AFAIK, that combination will *not* react to produce significant amounts of O2 Where do you think all that SO2 and CO2 goes nowadays? Maybe bacterial and eukaryotic species with photosynthetic trait releases the O2 from CO2 for instance. As I mentioned bacteria with various traits terraform or contribute to terraformation and ensure the biological cycle. Don't forget there are anaerobic and autotrophic species.

First thank you for having a comment, there are not many having the courage >>Someone with more geology knowledge correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK, volcanoes do not release oxygen. Main volcano gas releases are sulfur dioxide and carbon dioxide. For example, on May 13, 1991, 500 tonnes of sulfur dioxide were released from Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines. >>Any extra DNA would be a burden on so simple an organism as a bacteria (note how little of their DNA is unused), and any bacteria that discarded this "memory store" would enjoy faster reproduction and lower nutrient requirements, which means natural selection will ensure that bacteria will out-compete those who retain the stores, eliminating them. >>Let's not forget that any "stored" DNA is subject to mutation (*and* that bacteria have a higher mutation rate than eukaryotes), so by the time the bacteria even could evolve into eukaryotic or multicellular life, all that would be left is the random genetic gibberish. All the information would be wiped out by accumulated mutations. There is no such thing as a burden in cells - they just function as they are made to. Now most cells have mechanism to mutate as the "transposons" so they can adapt to their environment. This means that a memory cell can be designed not to mutate or mutate but doesn't touch the suppressed DNA. Archaea is another kingdom it's different than the bacterium. >>I suggest you actually learn something about Darwin and natural selection. 1) It is called a "theory", not a hunch. The difference is mountains and mountains of evidence. 2) While he didn't all our modern knowledge, guess what? Theories can be changed, and evolution has (fittingly) evolved to suit new discoveries and data. What is currently used is the New Synthesis, a re-formulation far superior to the old. 3) I am not aware of any significant major gaps in modern evolutionary theory. 4) Encyclopedias are worthless, pedestrian tomes. If you want real information, look in the primary literature or at least in textbooks. Natural selection actually is not a modern theory. If you like the Dawin theory it's ok, but just prove me wrong. "Guilty until proven innocent" All I know is the more I research my theory the more the puzzle fits by itself. >>1) There is no need for a new model. Evolution as is works perfectly well and explains the data. 2) None of the crackpot "new models" proposed have ever been able to show that their "new model" is any better, explains things more clearly and completely, or accounts for more data. In fact, most have glaring holes and are formulated by those with a merely cursory knowledge of biology. Nobody have the right to say that this is it, this is the right one. Anyway Darwin himself hesitated about his theory - "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." I’m happy if anybody can give a comment.