jerrywickey

What am I missing here? This graph clearly shows that the earth is currently at the coldest it has ever been and the CO2 levels don't correlate with global temperatures nearly as much as people are worried about. It also shows that we are very due for a much larger temperature rise than anyone is talking about. Both humans and animals will adapt to the temperature when the earth returns to its apparently more normal hotter temperature. Human civilization may be a different story. Can anyone fill me in? What is the global warming, humans are doing it, fuss all about? If this graph is correct, it really doesn't look like we have a chance of stopping it and we sure didn't cause it. The million year ride back to the more normal 22 Celsius will be a rough ride, probably replete with cold and hot spells. Periods of calm and periods of incredible climate upheaval. Some lasting ten years, some a hundred years and some ten thousand years. But all inevitable, none the less. We are clearly overdue for this rise to what looks like the earth's preferred temperature. Jerry

History channel aired the show "How Life Began" will air again 10 PM Saturday June 21 Very disappointing. Full of platitudes and they spent only one minute on the very title of the show, "how life began." It took place behind a curtain about which the narrator commented that no one understands how life began. I think the show should have gone more like this. Perhaps anyone can chime in and suggest errors I made. 1) chemicals and condition necessary for abiogenesis ????? presto chango -- ABIOGENESIS of one or more first replicators over perhaps 100 to 500 million years ??????? 2) first replicators adapt to acquire nutrients and avoid fatal circumstances 3) replicators successful at step 2 utilized DNA as info storage and developed RNA transcript and protein coding expression regulatory mechanisms 4) somehow all alternate expression mechanisms ceased leaving only the one we see today. ...............and gene splicing mechanisms developed so that separate organisms could share genes 5) earliest life we observe, first O2 producing algae, complete with DNA promotion, transcription, genetic code for translation and gene splicing mechanisms that we see today. 6) gene splicing rotates and tests genetic combination for perhaps 3 billion years but accomplishes little. 7) about half a billion years ago something happens in a geologic blink of an eye that 3 billion years of gene splicing was unable to accomplish, all life categories we see today emerge. 8) today This still doesn't address exactly how life began. Of course, that is a mystery as the show said. No one knows and no one has yet demonstrated a suitable first replicator molecular system. Jerry

Death is accepted as a natural part of life. I have even heard educated people say: "The job of bacteria is to eat, reproduce and die." Death seems to be assumed as a natural component of life. Perhaps in some religious or an irrational dogma connected to a yin yang idea of some mythical balance to the universe. The fact is that biology tends to organize material and keep it that way. Bacteria don't die. They eat, reproduce daughter cells and continue themselves. They continually renew themselves. One has to define the process of reproduction as death to claim otherwise. Immortality does not protect an organism from diseases or fatal injury. None the less the majority of the biomass of earth is immortal. There is no natural life span for most of the biological organisms on earth. The longer an individual organism lives the greater the chances that organism will encounter some fatal circumstances, but the majority of organisms do not experience genetically organized death. Even the cells of most land vertebrates who experience genetically organized death, regenerate continually as if they were immortal until the mechanism of death is triggered. There really is no reason to call death a natural part of life. Death must be a special adaptation reserved to the minor portion of life on earth. Jerry

Yes. That is the assumption of my simulation software. But RNA world theory provides a perfect environment for just such diversity. Although we don't see it.!!?? Jerry

Universally conserved sequences of DNA strongly suggest a single common early ancestor. Any one disagree? This common ancestor must predate the Cambrian explosion of life, since all life today shares these sequences. Any one disagree? "...New chemistry and genomic tools have revealed that the Shark Bay stromatolites have remarkable biodiversity, with evidence so far of more than 100 species of bacteria. In effect, this suggests that by 3.5 billion years ago Earth was already teeming with diverse microbial life." --ACA deputy director Professor Brett Neilan Earliest life on earth was both anaerobic and diverse. Any one disagree? The common ancestor must have been among these diverse anaerobic organisms. Any one disagree? Now for the question. Could some of this diverse anaerobic early life have utilized some other mechanisms than DNA, promotion, transcription, and protein translation? Is it more likely that a single strain of these anaerobics were the common ancestor of all present day life? Or is all present day life descendant from many of these diverse organisms? If many, and since all present day life utilizes DNA, promotion, transcription, protein translation, should we see remnants of these divers mechanisms? Since we don't observe this, what happened to all this diversity? If DNA, promotion, transcription and protein translation are the only route to life, and if they evolved so early and so rapidly in abiotic conditions, much less conducive to abiogenesis than today's biotic conditions, why has not other sets of conserved sequences arisen within only the last billion years, giving rise to distinct genealogies of life with their own conserved sequences? i.e. Why does not exist more than one set of widely but not universally conserved sequences? The domains Archaea, Eubacteria and Eukaryota all use the same highly conserved sequences for promotion and transcription. Why do we not see another domain with vary divergent sequences? Either life is very robust, in which case we should see more than one set of conserved sequences for promotion and transcription. Or life is very very special, too special, in which case, we should not be here. Or the conditions which existed on earth were so carefully controlled and fell so perfectly within that thin line between the two conditions above suggesting some extra natural force was involved. Which is it? Jerry

Of course! There are four nucleotides, (actually five. U and T are very similar, U appearing in RNA while T appears in DNA) each pairing with its compliment. But the message sent into space intended to indicate the size of human DNA as being comprised of a total of 4 billion nucleotides, each one of these would be one of the four. A T C G. We have since found that human DNA is only 3.2 billion nucleotides long. Did you have a comment relavant to what someone unfamiliar with the message sent might see in the message? Or how the message might be inturpreted? Jerry

In 1974 the Arecibo radio telescope transmitted a radio signal into interstellar space. The intended content of the message was almost entirely biological information. Among which information was the inaccurate number of nucleotides in human DNA. In 1974 we believed that there were in excess of 4 billion base pairs in human DNA. What would a group of humans with an interest and varying degrees of education in biology make of such a message, if they had intercepted it? Anybody want to take a crack at cracking the code? Anyone can look up what the message means by simply Googling "1974 Arecibo radio message" But thinking people might prefer to "decipher" the message on their own. Just to find out if another group of humans or aliens might be able to figure it out. If you chose not to Google the info and look at the signal instead just as you might have seen it with out prior knowledge of it, you may learn some things about how communication works. What follows is a representation of the actual information as it might be received, "demodulated" and recorded by some alien radio receiver intercepting the signal at some unknown time and at some unknown place. While, the likelihood of receiving a response from an intelligent ET from this outward bound radio message is very slight for many reasons, the raw data that was transmitted is interesting in itself as a study of the nature of information. I have tried several times to post things that are interesting to me in the attempt to find a few people who find the same wonder and the same motivation to investigate primarily for our own understanding and only secondarily for the advancement of others. The reason for the inversion of priorities is simply self edification is the more likely of the two. However, every thread is hijacked with criticisms that don't advance the thread. They are far off topic. This destroys my enjoyment and makes the thread impossible to follow. I regret the missed opportunity which would have been available to me and the other on topic replies to these posts which were obliterated by thread hijacking. So as a response, I am changing direction. From now on, I will discuss things which are interesting with people in person. I will share fun things with this gang. Lets see if this can stay on topic. To help keep this on topic: Replies telling why ET response is unlikely should be another thread. Replies suggesting I am stupid or uneducated should also be directed to another thread. Just start a thread called Jerry is Stupid and go to town on it. Replies suggesting interpretations of the data are preferred. The purpose of this thread is to investigate the commonality of all information. Not to discuss the likelyhood of alien intelligance. The information you are about to see communicates basic information about biology. This section of this forum should include people who know some things about biology. Lets find out? =============NEWS FLASH============= A radio transmission of an arraignment not likely of natural origin was recorded. Please help in deciphering this signal. To help your investigation you will find comments on 1) the signal's origin, 2) the reason for the certainty that the signal contains information, 3) the signal's mode of transmission, 4) the signals contents and some suggestions as to the meaning. Signal Origin: No star system is currently in the vicinity from which direction the signal came. But, a star having eight planets of highly regular orbits and one of elliptical orbit would have intersected the signal path and would have been present at that location exactly at the time the signal traveling at light speed would have passed that point. The likelihood of intelligent origin from within that star system is elevated. Information in the Signal: The signal flip flops between two very close frequencies 794 times and the time between the shortest flip flop is exactly one 1679th the total length of the signal. This flip flop can be described as four different modes. 1) Rising in frequency 2) falling in frequency 3) remaining at the higher frequency and 4) remaining at the lower frequency. The respective number of these four modes is not natural or the likely result of any natural phenomena. Rising occurred 221 times falling occurred 221 times (this two being same would be expected of course) remaining high occurred 176 times remaining low occurred 1060 times (this discrepancy suggests order is present) Change of frequency in one time frame / - 221 rising \ - 221 falling ¯ - 176 remaining high _ - 1061 remaining low Change of frequency in three time frames ___ - 899 remaingin low three time periods in a row __/ - 160 rising after remaining low \__ - 160 falling and remaining low curiosly the same /¯\ - 130 rises and falls /¯¯ - 91 rising and remaining high ¯¯\ - 91 falling from a sustained high curiously the same ¯¯¯ - 85 remains high \_/ - 61 falls then rises 1697 is a curious number but may not mean anything. 1697 is only the product of two prime numbers 73 and 23. The significance of this may be nothing, however. The actual signal now follows. Represented as the rising and falling frequency changes. The same data is represented three times. It is the same data but broken to fit on a page. (I understand cultures alien to us might be as comfortable with a long line of data as they are with breaking it up into segments to fit it on a page as we are. What would you make of a long line of data? Anything? This is one of the important questions, the answer to which will tell us if information follows the same rules everywhere. Does the information in DNA share characteristics with data on a written page?) The first representation breaks the data into pieces each of 41 equel lengths. This leaves two time slices vacant on the last line. But using the prime number factors of 1679 we find that the data can be represented with out any missing time slices, because the data can be equally divided among all the lines. _____/\/\/\/\___________/\/\____/\/\_____ _/\_/\__/\__/\__/\_/\/¯\_/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ /\_/\_/\_________________________________ ___/¯\__________________/¯\/\____________ ______/¯\/\_________________/\/\/\_______ __________/¯¯¯¯\_________________________ ______/¯\___/¯¯\__/¯\___/¯\__/\__________ __/¯\_/\___/¯\/\__/¯\__/¯\___/¯\/\/¯¯¯¯\/ ¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\________________________ _/\________________/\____________________ _______/\________________/¯¯¯¯¯\_________ ___/¯¯¯¯\______________________/¯\___/¯\_ __/¯¯\__/¯\__/\______/\________/\___/¯\/\ ___/¯\__/¯¯\_/¯\/\/¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯ \_________________________/\_____/¯\_____ ___/\__________/¯\______________/\____/¯\ _________/¯¯¯¯¯\____/¯\_____/¯¯¯¯\_______ __/¯\____________/\_______/\_______/\____ /\_____/¯\______/\______/¯\___/¯\_____/\_ ________/¯\__/\___/¯\______________/¯\_/¯ \____________/¯\__/\___/¯\________/¯\___/ ¯\_____/\______/\_____/\_______/\____/\__ ____/¯\_______/\__/\_______/¯\_______/\__ /\________/\______/\____/\______/\______/ \______/\___________/¯\________/¯\_______ /¯\________/\__/¯¯\/\/¯\__________/\_____ _/\_____________/\____/¯¯¯¯\___________/\ ___/\/¯¯\/\_/\/¯\/¯\_____/\_/¯¯\_/\_/¯¯¯¯ ¯¯\/¯¯\___/¯¯\____/¯\/¯¯\________/\/\____ /¯¯\/¯\_/\_____/\/\____/¯¯¯¯¯\_/\_____/\/ \____/¯\_____/\____/¯\/¯\________________ __________________/¯¯\____/\_____________ /¯¯\/\/\__/\/\/\/\/\/\_/¯¯\________/\/\/\ /\_______________/\/\_____________/¯¯¯¯\_ ______________/¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯\___________/¯¯\__ ____/¯¯\________/¯\__________/¯\______/¯\ /\________/\/¯\____/¯\_/¯\______/¯\_/¯\__ _/\__/\/\____/\/\__/\___/\__/\_/\__/\_/\_ _/\_______/\__/\/\__/\___________/\___/\_ __/\___________/\________/\_____________/ \_/\/\__________/¯¯¯\_/¯¯¯¯\/\_/¯¯¯\__ _____/\/\/\/\__________ _/\/\____/\/\______/\_/ \__/\__/\__/\_/\/¯\_/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\_/\_/\__ _______________________ ___________/¯\_________ _________/¯\/\_________ _________/¯\/\_________ ________/\/\/\_________ ________/¯¯¯¯\_________ ______________________/ ¯\___/¯¯\__/¯\___/¯\__/ \____________/¯\_/\___/ ¯\/\__/¯\__/¯\___/¯\/\/ ¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\ _______________________ __/\________________/\_ _______________________ ___/\________________/¯ ¯¯¯¯\____________/¯¯¯¯\ ______________________/ ¯\___/¯\___/¯¯\__/¯\__/ \______/\________/\___/ ¯\/\___/¯\__/¯¯\_/¯\/\/ ¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\ _______________________ __/\_____/¯\________/\_ _________/¯\___________ ___/\____/¯\_________/¯ ¯¯¯¯\____/¯\_____/¯¯¯¯\ _________/¯\___________ _/\_______/\_______/\__ __/\_____/¯\______/\___ ___/¯\___/¯\_____/\____ _____/¯\__/\___/¯\_____ _________/¯\_/¯\_______ _____/¯\__/\___/¯\_____ ___/¯\___/¯\_____/\____ __/\_____/\_______/\___ _/\______/¯\_______/\__ /\_______/¯\_______/\__ /\________/\______/\___ _/\______/\______/\____ __/\___________/¯\_____ ___/¯\_______/¯\_______ _/\__/¯¯\/\/¯\_________ _/\______/\____________ _/\____/¯¯¯¯\__________ _/\___/\/¯¯\/\_/\/¯\/¯\ _____/\_/¯¯\_/\_/¯¯¯¯¯¯ \/¯¯\___/¯¯\____/¯\/¯¯\ ________/\/\____/¯¯\/¯\ _/\_____/\/\____/¯¯¯¯¯\ _/\_____/\/\____/¯\____ _/\____/¯\/¯\__________ _______________________ _/¯¯\____/\____________ _/¯¯\/\/\__/\/\/\/\/\/\ _/¯¯\________/\/\/\/\__ _____________/\/\______ _______/¯¯¯¯\__________ _____/¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯\________ ___/¯¯\______/¯¯\______ __/¯\__________/¯\_____ _/¯\/\________/\/¯\____ /¯\_/¯\______/¯\_/¯\___ /\__/\/\____/\/\__/\___ /\__/\_/\__/\_/\__/\___ ____/\__/\/\__/\_______ ____/\___/\___/\_______ ____/\________/\_______ ______/\_/\/\__________ /¯¯¯\_/¯¯¯¯\/\_/¯¯¯\___ _____/\/\/\/\___________/\/\____/\/\______/\_/\__/\__/\__/\_/\/¯\_/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\_/\_/\____________________________________/¯\_________________ _/¯\/\__________________/¯\/\_________________/\/\/\_________________/¯¯¯ ¯\_______________________________/¯\___/¯¯\__/¯\___/¯\__/\____________/¯\ _/\___/¯\/\__/¯\__/¯\___/¯\/\/¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\____________________ _____/\________________/\___________________________/\________________/¯¯ ¯¯¯\____________/¯¯¯¯\______________________/¯\___/¯\___/¯¯\__/¯\__/\____ __/\________/\___/¯\/\___/¯\__/¯¯\_/¯\/\/¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\/¯¯¯¯\_________ ________________/\_____/¯\________/\__________/¯\______________/\____/¯\_ ________/¯¯¯¯¯\____/¯\_____/¯¯¯¯\_________/¯\____________/\_______/\_____ __/\____/\_____/¯\______/\______/¯\___/¯\_____/\_________/¯\__/\___/¯\___ ___________/¯\_/¯\____________/¯\__/\___/¯\________/¯\___/¯\_____/\______ /\_____/\_______/\____/\______/¯\_______/\__/\_______/¯\_______/\__/\____ ____/\______/\____/\______/\______/\______/\___________/¯\________/¯\____ ___/¯\________/\__/¯¯\/\/¯\__________/\______/\_____________/\____/¯¯¯¯\_ __________/\___/\/¯¯\/\_/\/¯\/¯\_____/\_/¯¯\_/\_/¯¯¯¯¯¯\/¯¯\___/¯¯\____/¯ \/¯¯\________/\/\____/¯¯\/¯\_/\_____/\/\____/¯¯¯¯¯\_/\_____/\/\____/¯\___ __/\____/¯\/¯\__________________________________/¯¯\____/\_____________/¯ ¯\/\/\__/\/\/\/\/\/\_/¯¯\________/\/\/\/\_______________/\/\_____________ /¯¯¯¯\_______________/¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯\___________/¯¯\______/¯¯\________/¯\______ ____/¯\______/¯\/\________/\/¯\____/¯\_/¯\______/¯\_/¯\___/\__/\/\____/\/ \__/\___/\__/\_/\__/\_/\__/\_______/\__/\/\__/\___________/\___/\___/\___ ________/\________/\_____________/\_/\/\__________/¯¯¯\_/¯¯¯¯\/\_/¯¯¯\___ It appears certain that if information is contained in this signal, the second representation would be the most likely interpretation. Since many straight lines seem to appear. What could it possibly mean? Or is it simply random information? Jerry

colors are arbitrarily asigned as the blobs represent individual atoms which of course are smaller than the wavelengths of visable light. We will never be able to actually "see" them. Jerry

Yup I think you are correct. The only thing we could do is explore the implications of each of the possibilities I identified. What a waist of effort, since only one of them will be correct. Jerry

Click the image for the animation This animation is of DNA polymerase replicating both the leading and lagging strand of DNA. This is a visualization of a group of molecules that are smaller than the wavelength of visible light, copying the instructions of life. It a spectacular animation of a process going on inside all of our bodies a billion times over as you watch it on the screen. The molecular sized machines at work here are built according to instructions found in the very DNA they could be replicating. The instructions in DNA describe how to build molecular sized machines, proteins, that carry on both chemical and mechanical activity. Enjoy! Thanks to http://www.wehi.edu.au Jerry

YES!!! You see the obsticles. Others post that protein evolution is a simple matter that has been solved over and over again. Thanks

Thanks for the compliment. But I was more interested in understanding it in depth than reinventing anything. I find learning is much better then just reading. Jerry

Mile stones between prebiotic chemistry to present day DNA based life Organic Chemistry (no evolutionary principles apply yet) First replicator (fundamental principles of evolution apply for the first time) Something analogous to if not Ribozymes (serving only as enzymes) or Nucleic Proteins But limited to only what can arise spontaneously again and again for each generation of replicators. (This is the toughest time for replicators, since natural selection still can not operate on the enzymes and nucleic proteins that may have arisen.) Replication of Information Describing Organisms (possibly nucleotides) Coincident with Active Metabolism (This is the single most important step required for further growth toward current biology) AND True Riboszymes (serving a ribosomal function to interpret the information) and Nucleic Proteins carried over from the previous generation. would have had to arise independently and coincidentally (only after both previous steps, can natural selection begin to select superior advantages to replication) (replication becomes reproduction) A switch to DNA with nucleotides if not already nucleotides DNA Polymerase DNA Transcriptase Ribosome True Protein (evolution proper would begin to apply here) Current Observed Biology What's wrong here, anything? Are there any steps that could be skipped? Can anyone suggest a different order? Are any steps missing? Do we need all these steps? Jerry

I apologize. Looks like you read what I thought you didn't. It is just that you don't accept some of the findings. Fair enough. Jerry

This is getting frustrating. You believe that I do not understand variation and selection. You believe that my post is inconsistent with accepted findings. You answer questions which have not been introduced. However, you do not address the post. You have not yet made one comment germane to my argument. My post is consistent with accepted findings. I do understand variation and selection. You wrote a lot but at no point did you quote any thing I wrote under the heading "Here is how it works." I clearly and slowly describe the process. Each statement is identified and it is true. Can you find a single error? You didn't comment on any of it. Perhaps, you read a phrase and it triggers a recollection of an unrelated topic. Then you habitually spin off in that direction. Try reading the explanation and finding the error there. I have run into a lot of people who should understand evolution, but keep getting caught up in terminology which prevents them from understanding some of the basic principles. I am writing an evolution primer that addresses many of these misunderstandings. I bet you are going to have fun with that. Jerry