Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: OT: Dynamic DNA structures and the formation of memory
Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 00:52:14 +1000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 94
Message-ID: <v1t9f2$3h6sb$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v175s8$1mprm$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsvf3jt621a4kvtj2rq4162nhcpvsubeda@4ax.com> <v1rpvh$335cp$1@dont-email.me>
 <77r24jloc6k59o98o9nb47j8ul3n3ngh6a@4ax.com> <v1siuq$3bu3f$1@dont-email.me>
 <70744jl77r3gfd4emv9963073u37ocrnhn@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 16:52:19 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="94f0f64ffe6556e838ede627a1f17149";
	logging-data="3709835"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/YwOtG8AzcJoynZyfQjAbnKnjUahyBKak="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:lREuTR0zpQYLvsKHyWJZogiCOSk=
In-Reply-To: <70744jl77r3gfd4emv9963073u37ocrnhn@4ax.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 5297

On 14/05/2024 12:10 am, John Larkin wrote:
> On Mon, 13 May 2024 10:30:09 +0200, Jeroen Belleman
> <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:
> 
>> On 5/13/24 03:30, John Larkin wrote:
>>> On Sun, 12 May 2024 21:21:56 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
>>> <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 05 May 2024 05:36:06 GMT, Jan Panteltje
>>>>> <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dynamic DNA structures and the formation of memory
>>>>>> https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/05/240501125755.htm
>>>>>> Summary:
>>>>>> An international collaborative research team has discovered that
>>>>>> G-quadraplex DNA (G4-DNA) accumulates in neurons and dynamically
>>>>>> controls the activation and repression of genes underlying long-term
>>>>>> memory formation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have always though that memory could be stored as DNA sequenxes...
>>>>>
>>>>> More likely RNA or some other protein.
>>>>>
>>>>> The oft-mocked Lamarckian concept, of genetic learning (not just
>>>>> natural selection) is probably real, and some reverse transcription
>>>>> does happen, namely that DNA is edited within the life of one
>>>>> organism. But remembering where you left your glasses is probably
>>>>> handled at a lower level than editing your chromosones.
>>>>
>>>> But how can it be passed down as Lamarck thought, if the eggs in the
>>>> ovaries are formed early? If genetic memory could be passed down it
>>>> would be only from the father because sperm are formed recently. But the
>>>> sperm spawn from local cells. If DNA is edited to store memory then
>>>> would these changes be duplicated in all cells in all tissues? How else
>>>> would the changes get into sperm cells? How could they get into eggs?
>>>>
>>>
>>> If it is advantageous for a woman's life experiences to be passed onto
>>> her children, nature will find a way.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, it's called 'education'. No need to invent improbable
>> mechanisms without scientific basis.
>>
>> Jeroen Belleman
> 
> No sense in dismissing possibilities because you don't like them. That
> applies to biology and electronics. Nature invents "improbable
> mechanisms" which have a "scientific basis" when shown to exist.

But you've invented an improbable mechanism without having a shred of 
evidence that might suggest that it might exist.
> 
> The ideas of jumping genes, reverse transcription, and epignetic
> switching were all mocked, known to be impossible, by the rigid
> neo-Darwinists. I think there's all sorts of cool stuff waiting for
> old farts to die so they can be considered and discovered.
> Mitochondria are sadly neglected.

You don't know what you are talking about.

> Evolution by random mutation and natural selection is for losers.
> Losers are also known as lunch.

True, but it has been the only game in town for the last billion years 
or so. We've finally worked some of the nuts and bolts, and have some 
kind of grasp of what has been going on - you don't seem to, even if you 
think you do.

Intelligent design will probably work better - you don't seem to know 
how that works either - but tinkering with poorly designed gear that you 
don't understand doesn't.

> Most people, including most engineers, are instantly hostile to
> unauthorized ideas. That's fine with me... it leaves me more stuff to
> invent and sell.

People with more sense - and more education - than you have, do get 
hostile to bad ideas. Unorthodox ideas are trickier, and you do have to 
sort the wheat from the chaff (and there is a lot of chaff). You don't 
seem to be able to manage that.

You want an audience which is just as gullible as you are, and you get 
testy when your ineptitude gets pointed out. Climate change denial isn't 
"unorthodox" - it's just self-interested lies from the fossil carbon 
extraction industry, and you haven't woken up to that yet.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney