Naked Science Forum

On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: Raphael on 22/01/2013 18:26:41

Title: Falsifiability of Evolution - PHOsphenes and DNA
Post by: Raphael on 22/01/2013 18:26:41
Actually Dawkins critique was more concerned about showing that "punctuated equilibrium" did not conflict with continuous evolution and that the scientific press (and to some extent the authors Eldredge and Gould) made more of this concept than it deserved.

It is not "science negating science" at all ...

But it is .... you just repeated what I said but twisted the statement, DUHkins critique of Eldredge and Gould is obvious because his gradual theory needs to explain those punctuations.

Paleontologists put forth the punctuated equilibrium theory because they realized the Darwinian theory of gradual evolution is 'gravely' flawed.
The fact scientists DISSED 95% of DNA and called it JUNK is also evidence the scientific method is severely flawed and to be questioned.
They took the JUNK code out to the curbside because it appeared as useless gibberish?

Nature is EFFICIENT and it likes to cheat and take short cuts, it does not create a DNA data storage system where 95% of its purpose is JUNK.
All those algorithms too?

Conventional wisdom is that RNA-based life eventually switched to DNA because DNA is better at storing information. In other words, RNA organisms made the first DNA.

If that is true, how did life make the switch? Modern organisms can convert RNA nucleotides into DNA nucleotides, but only using special enzymes that are costly to produce in terms of energy and materials.

"You have to know that DNA does something good for you before you invent something like that," Switzer says.

New Scientist 24 August 2012 by Michael Marshall

The evolution of all LIFE on this planet including plants, animals, and humans hinge upon DNA and RNA or essentially a FIVE letter code that is about 3.5+ billion years old ... and that is a fact of science not fiction.

DNA = AT and CG 
RNA = AU and CG

And other scientists claim that DNA as a life form itself is incredibly complex, how did it become so complex?
Let me know when the geneticists figure out the this point we have JUNKyard dogs vs. JUNK-DNA gods IMHO.

What you are saying is that the ultimate computer (processing algorithms plus data storage) still being developed today by us (we are at version Windows 8) arrived 3.5 billion years ago and all those other versions leading up to the ultimate computer still to be developed sometime in the future, is like saying Newton/Leibniz, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs working out of their garages was an unnecessary step, Windows like 3.1, the APPLE, and the Commodore Amiga were not necessary?
Where is the evolution process in that?

My INTUITION is suggesting your LOGIC is flawed.

And why has the flying mammal not changed in 50 million years BATman?
It has a great echolocation system and can make 90 degree turns...NASA would love to be able to do what a bat does, we could call it a IFO instead of those stealth UFOs NASA never admits too.
Idenitified Flying Object
Was the BAT perfect 50 million years ago...?
Why have humans changed so much in the past 10 million years according to current theories but the Bat has undergone very little change?

Are we flawed and need to evolve but the bat living in caves seems to have hit the ceiling of its purpose as a super-duper hero bug catcher in possession of alien 'turn on a dime' technology.
I think more scientists should spend time in the cave with Plato and the Dark Knight Bat-man and see what kind of Holy Spirit PHOsphenes they can generate....
Plato would probably remind the evolutionist that DNA replicates using geometry.


BTW PHOsphenes is another 'science' hinting that 'evolution' as a theory needs to be taken to the JUNK yard.
PHOsphenes are part of a science that we can use to bridge 'science' and 'religion'.
And that is another fact of science.

The SEVEN SEALS we see below resemble many of those 15 documented NASA phosphenes that we see in the above image.
And the images of the SEVEN SEALS are said to be depicting the ”great Names or Symbols of God”.

7 Mystical Seals – Phosphenes – Rock Art Symbols – Giordano Bruno – Hans Jenny – Cymatics – Ernest Chladni – Fibonacci
my blog >>

Science has a purpose - as a tool to understand what TRUTH is.
It is not to be worshipped as a god, didn't religion teach us that?

selah V
Title: Re: Falsifiability of Evolution - PHOsphenes and DNA
Post by: graham.d on 23/01/2013 09:34:30
Organic life does not have any mechanism to divine what will be a successful change to its DNA. The DNA gets randomly changed (mostly with disastrous results) but on a rare occasion with some change which turns out to be beneficial to the survival of the species. This advantage then gets selected for because the advantages it bestows mean that the subsequent generations with this genetic change have a better chance of survival than those that do not have the change. Such a change may even eventually result (with further genetic changes) into a new species. I therefore don't find it too surprising that a lot of DNA has no specific advantagious function though I agree there has been much debate on the subject.

In past times there were periods of fast change (relatively speaking) to the earth's flora and forna. In a number of cases this has been correlated with mass extinctions (probably due to a meteorite strike) which would also have the effect of allowing previously uncompetitive life to develop. The earth's periodic magnetic reversal may also have been responsible for periods where the numbers of mutations were very high because of the high radiation levels. This would produce a period of higher diversity.
Title: Re: Falsifiability of Evolution - PHOsphenes and DNA
Post by: CliffordK on 23/01/2013 11:46:46
There certainly are many cases of genetic drift, or slow evolution.

Any time a group of animals (or humans for that matter) becomes isolated, or separated from another group, there is genetic drift causing separation between the two groups.

For example, the northern white rhino, and the southern white rhino became physically isolated, and the breeds drifted to become separate species.

Likewise, several different equine species have evolved different features, including some with prominent white and black stripes.

Humans historically have become isolated, and and evolved different skin colors, facial features, hair types, and etc.  And, while humanity is now a great mixing pot, there is no reason to believe that humans don't continue to evolve. 

Certainly selective breeding is a type of accelerated evolution, in which over the last few thousand years, Chihuahuas have evolved on a different pathway from St. Bernards.

However, even without separation, one would expect a certain amount of genetic drift within a species.

Certainly there would be occasional rapid shifts, perhaps due to environmental stress, disease, or a new mutation that provides a particular benefit to the species.

As far as non-coding DNA.
Apparently only about 2% of the DNA actually codes for proteins.  However, that doesn't mean that 98% of the DNA is unnecessary. 

Consider telomeres, for example.  They don't encode for proteins, but are vital for our longevity. 

This article ( suggests that as much as 80% of the non-coding DNA has other functions including gene regulatory functions.  Perhaps over time we'll discover other functions for more of the DNA.  However, it wouldn't be unexpected that some DNA would be unused as one could imagine genes that are no longer needed or expressed, or mutations creating "extra" DNA.  Perhaps DNA viruses or retroviruses added to the genome, then later to become inactivated, or otherwise some environmental DNA entered the cell.

In fact, perhaps the concept of "Junk DNA" would be a good argument against intelligent design, as there would be no need for a divine designer to add extra DNA.  But, a process of mutations might, in fact, generate some unused portions of the chromosomes.
Title: Re: Falsifiability of Evolution - PHOsphenes and DNA
Post by: Raphael on 23/01/2013 13:45:34
Organic life does not have any mechanism to divine what will be a successful change to its DNA.

no point in discussing anything beyond the first line graham.d

YOU claim to be a science guy?
Then please raise your game instead of trying to get ME to come down to your level.

'we the science sheeple' rebleating nonsense holds us all back IMHO
clearly you do NOT want to read anything that might challenge your religion called science.
shrinks call that 'cognitive dissonance'
I call it checking into the Hotel DeNILE
How do you like the view of the Great Pyramid, the TIME CapSOUL that has yet to reveal ALL of its secrets to 'we the sheeple'?
<non-technical, unscientific links removed, as per earlier warning and in keeping with forum's AUP>

I offered you plenty of mechanisms in the above post that you want to ignore.
By definition that makes you IGNORANT.

PHOsphenes are a mechanism.
NASA studied them in the 60s, how many of 'we the sheeple' have heard of them?
'we the sheeple' are blind to the obvious....and 21st century science is using PHOsphene technology to help folks who are blind to see....another irony or paradox or whatever you want to call it.
can I suggest you put these phrases in your browser:

'stars in your eyes to help blind people see'

'Phosphenes produced by electrical stimulation of human occipital cortex, and their application to the development of a prosthesis for the blind'

'Magnetically induced phosphenes in sighted, blind and blindsighted observers'

What effect do the solar winds have on the MACRO electro-magnetic field of the earth?
How do the solar winds effect PHOsphenes and our DNA which exhibits its own MICRO electro-magnetic field?
Electromagnetic fields and DNA damage?

And I have not even touched upon what the Russians and Chinese are doing with western Junk DNA they picked up at the curbside.
One man's garbage (the material west) is another man's treasure (the east)

Want a glimpse of genius in the making?
<non-technical, unscientific link removed; calling members ignorant for having a different opinion is also very much against the spirit of the forum: - Mod>

Read this IF you DARE, IF you can handle the TRUTH.
Please stop wasting my time graham d. and stay away from the kiddies before you harm them with your IGNORANCE.

All of the above is meant to be funny.
Because reality has become a sick joke and humor can heal the heels.

selah V
Title: Re: Falsifiability of Evolution - PHOsphenes and DNA
Post by: graham.d on 23/01/2013 14:23:34
Given this response, I am not going to trouble to further this discussion.
Title: Re: Falsifiability of Evolution - PHOsphenes and DNA
Post by: CliffordK on 23/01/2013 22:20:48
As far as Phosphenes (, or various ocular or cerebral stimulation that gives the belief of seeing something that isn't truly there. 

There has been discussions that a near death experience may, in fact, involve some kind of light aura due to the effects of starving brain cells. 

While we are all capable of daydreaming, I do wonder if those individuals that have mental states causing difficulty separating dreams from reality have unduly influenced religion.