Is DNA really a recent discovery?

 dna

Now that they claim that the human genome pro­ject is com­ple­ted, it may take a while for the “smoke to clear”, or as some cons­pi­racy theo­rists may sug­gest, “for the evi­dence to be hidden”.

It seems that there are some few genes in our code that don’t appear in anything else on the pla­net. Some are pre­sent in bac­te­ria. One report says 223, the other says 40. Either way, if those genes did not evolve on earth, how did they get in us? The impli­ca­tions are that evo­lu­tion is only partly res­pon­si­ble for our appa­rent inte­lli­gience and domi­na­tion of this little rock. One of the solu­tions pre­sen­ted are that we may have been chan­ged by bac­te­rial infec­tion. Another is that this proof that has been anti­ci­pa­ted by Inte­lli­gient Desig­ners that “God” crea­ted us by modif­ying our genes.

IMHO I have a pro­blem with both assump­tions: If bac­te­rial infec­tion could change our gene­tic struc­ture, then we could not pos­sibly be safe from this change repea­tedly in short periods of time. We would all be mutants, hardly simi­lar to our own family members.

On the other hand, if an omni­po­tent “God” crea­ted us, there would be no need to “modify” anything earthly to per­form the feat.

My real ques­tion is this: Is there any natu­ral way that we could have recei­ved these genes? How about a method that doesn’t depend on either cross-bacterial osmo­sis or god? 

 I think it is no acci­dent that the ancient sym­bol of the medi­cal pro­fes­sion (the Cadeu­seus) is stran­gely remi­nis­cent of an only recently dis­co­ve­red strand of DNA. I also think it is no acci­dent that the human race was sub­jec­ted to nume­rous gene­tic bott­le­necks, which evi­dence looks sus­pi­ciously like a bree­ding pro­gram. Why did the har­dier, stron­ger Nean­der­tal man go extinct while modern man flou­rished at a time when no other spe­cies were going extinct? How can we have exactly the same men­tal capa­city today as we did 30,000 years ago, but have only deci­ded to use it for something other than food gathe­ring over the last 4,000 years?

Posted on March 17, 2008 on 11:31 am | In Genetics | 9 Comments
divider

9 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

  1. Thanks Tom,
    I didn’t know that, howe­ver I am not the artist so I will look for a bet­ter image.
    –Jeff

    Comment by Jeff — November 11, 2009 #

  2. Er zit nog een fout in. Een DNA-helix is altijd rechts draaiend, maar de afbeel­ding bij deze tekst laat een links draaiende DNA-helix zien.

    There is still an error. A DNA helix is always run­ning right, but the image in this text shows a left-handed DNA helix-see.

    Comment by Tom — September 20, 2009 #

  3. Con­si­de­ring it is likely that dif­fe­ren­ces in gene­tics make for dif­fe­rent blood types and not the other way around, I think that the dif­fe­ring blood types in con­cert with the dif­fe­rent gene­tic haplo­groups can be used as clues to unra­vel the ques­tion of which chan­ges in our genes may have been due to natu­ral selec­tion, and which may have been direct tam­pe­ring or even bree­ding by the “gods” in times past. Remem­ber, the appea­rance of humans ove­rall do not lend one to believe we were desig­ned to be prey, nor pre­da­tors. we have little hair, lack in strength, and are gene­rally pretty deli­cate, com­pa­red to those we were sup­po­sed to evolve from (almost aqua­tic). So, I would guess a bree­ding pro­gram (gene­tic bott­le­neck) would have made us capa­ble of higher thought at the expense of our sur­vi­val cha­rac­te­ris­tics. Not sure what natu­ral selec­tion sce­na­rio would lend itself to that…

    Comment by Admin — May 8, 2009 #

  4. Do you think there is anything to the theo­ries about rh– blood types? Pos­sibly dif­fe­ren­ces in gene­tics? Some of the things I have read sound pretty scary!

    Comment by Donna — May 7, 2009 #

  5. Ama­zing. I’m only just lear­ning about all of the his­tory invol­ved in AAT and lear­ning the various theo­ries — could you quote some spe­ci­fic resour­ces for addi­tio­nal research? Anything that you’d spe­ci­fi­cally recommend?

    Comment by Eyrisahn — May 3, 2009 #

  6. Enki and Enlil are gods of the Sume­rian pantheon. They are pro­bably THE two most active gods when it comes to inte­rac­ting with humans. Enki is the Sume­rian name for the Greek Titan Pro­metheus, the Ser­pent in the Gar­den, and the chris­tian Satan, while Enlil goes on to be called Zeus, and the Hebrew god YWH. They are brothers, one born to rule the earth and the other to rule the skies. One was very kind to humans (even dona­ted his own DNA) and gave us fire and tech­no­logy to help us to pro­gress, but the other insis­ted in using us and being worship­ped by us. Can you guess which is which?

    Comment by Admin — April 25, 2009 #

  7. This is stri­kingly simi­lar to the argu­ment I have with friends when anyone will lis­ten to me rant. I’ve always main­tai­ned that it would be impos­si­ble for us to be on the pla­net for mille­nia and then sud­denly, POOF! Inte­lli­gence and cog­ni­zance. I think we’ve been recently mani­pu­la­ted again, which is part of the rea­son we went from using oil bur­ning lamps to using super­com­pu­ters in a sin­gle cen­tury (ok, cen­tury and a half, but the idea is still valid.) Not only have we most likely recently been tam­pe­red with, we are also most likely gai­ning from extra­te­rres­trial technologies.

    I do have a ques­tion, though. I’m not fami­liar with Enki or Enlil, though I enjo­yed rea­ding your wri­tings con­cer­ning them. Where did those refe­ren­ces ori­gi­nate from?

    Comment by Eyrisahn — April 25, 2009 #

  8. Great link Sid,
    It seems that it has been quite easy to mis­take the rela­tionship bet­ween these two sym­bols with appa­rently somewhat dif­fe­rent meanings.

    After dig­ging into the link you pro­vide, I think the Cadeu­seus is totally appro­priate for a mili­tary medic ope­ra­tion, due to the con­no­ta­tions of death and such. Howe­ver, there are still ties with the tree of life in the gar­den of Eden, and the asso­cia­tion with per­sua­sion and evil which makes me think the story of Enki/Enlil and Pro­metheus are still asso­cia­ted with both sym­bols (hence with the tech­no­logy of DNA mani­pu­la­tion) in some way.

    Comment by Admin — August 2, 2008 #

  9. Hello: The ancient sym­bol for the medi­cal pro­fes­sion is the Rod of Asc­le­pius, not the Cadu­ceus, which usage is an Ame­ri­can Army mis­take only about 100 years old. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_of_Asclepius

    Comment by Sid — August 1, 2008 #

Leave a comment

XHTML: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Add to Technorati Favorites Entries and comments feeds. Valid XHTML and CSS. ^Top^
24 queries. 1.341 seconds.
Powered by WordPress design by John Doe.