"The emergence of new genes from nothing has fascinated researchers. We now have an elegant model for the evolution of RNA genes,"
New genes found that can arise 'from nothing'
New genes found that can arise 'from nothing'
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The DNA has to be there in the first place ... so the new genes don't arise from nothing."The emergence of new genes from nothing has fascinated researchers. We now have an elegant model for the evolution of RNA genes,"
New genes found that can arise 'from nothing'
The DNA has to be there in the first place ... so the new genes don't arise from nothing.
True, we mustn't forget: Humans share almost all of their DNA with cats, cattle, and mice, and chimpanzees are 96% genetically similar to humans.3Another line of evidence showing our relationship to gorillas and chimps.
"The emergence of new genes from nothing has fascinated researchers.
TBF, "from nothing" is in quotes. They mean not as a result of a copy of a gene being modified, but a new gene that previously did not exist being formed due to a copy error that causes it to form in a single step. A whole gene that previously did not exist in the organisms' ancestors.Wrong terminology, unless they're talking "ex materia."
TBF, "from nothing" is in quotes. They mean not as a result of a copy of a gene being modified, but a new gene that previously did not exist being formed due to a copy error that causes it to form in a single step. A whole gene that previously did not exist in the organisms' ancestors.
I thought that the laws of physics taught us that nothing can arise from nothing and that energy can be neither created nor destroyed. It's telling that "from Nothing" in the title is in parenthesis. The actual article doesn't say it's from nothing. What it says is "Experts at the Institute of Biotechnology, University of Helsinki, Finland, resolved this mystery, describing a mechanism that can instantaneously generate complete DNA palindromes and thus create new microRNA genes from previously noncoding DNA sequences." So, they describe a "mechanism" that somehow (that's not explained, I hate it when they don't explain how) can create mRNA from previously non-coded DNA sequences. That's a far cry from nothing."The emergence of new genes from nothing has fascinated researchers. We now have an elegant model for the evolution of RNA genes,"
New genes found that can arise 'from nothing'
I thought that the laws of physics taught us that nothing can arise from nothing and that energy can be neither created nor destroyed. It's telling that "from Nothing" in the title is in parenthesis. The actual article doesn't say it's from nothing. What it says is "Experts at the Institute of Biotechnology, University of Helsinki, Finland, resolved this mystery, describing a mechanism that can instantaneously generate complete DNA palindromes and thus create new microRNA genes from previously noncoding DNA sequences." So, they describe a "mechanism" that somehow (that's not explained, I hate it when they don't explain how) can create mRNA from previously non-coded DNA sequences. That's a far cry from nothing.
Yes, it has been addressed, as you note twice. I hope the 3rd time is a charm.That has already been addressed in posts #4 and #8. Your complaint is moot.
TBF, "from nothing" is in quotes. They mean not as a result of a copy of a gene being modified, but a new gene that previously did not exist being formed due to a copy error that causes it to form in a single step. A whole gene that previously did not exist in the organisms' ancestors.
That has already been addressed in posts #4 and #8. Your complaint is moot.
UPDATE. It seems it's been addressed in post #3 as well. Seems several people read the actual article to find the truth. That, I believe is a good thing.That has already been addressed in posts #4 and #8. Your complaint is moot.
It's known as figurative language. The quotes around 'from nothing' indicate that it should not be taken literally.Yes, it has been addressed, as you note twice. I hope the 3rd time is a charm.
No it's not interesting. It's the idiocy of taxonomy.This image is super interesting. So, they find this method of creating these palindromes and then take a look at the DNA of primates to find them. Lo and behold: great apes, chimpanzees and humans all have the same palindromic sequence that the other ape and monkey species don't have, but they all have the same palindromic sequences shared between them. Isn't that interesting? Another line of evidence showing our relationship to gorillas and chimps.
No it's not interesting. It's the idiocy of taxonomy.
I don't think the onus is on me to explain anything. I think the burden of proof is on people who believe in taxonomy to explain the relevance of taxonomy.OK - since you've insulted those who practice the science of taxonomy, perhaps you could explain your reasoning - preferably without the snarky overtones.
OB
I don't think the onus is on me to explain anything. I think the burden of proof is on people who believe in taxonomy to explain the relevance of taxonomy.
with considerable interest.No it's not interesting. It's the idiocy of taxonomy.
You don't get off that easily either. First explain to me what you think taxonomy is, and then I'll insult it in more detail.You don't get off that easily.
It was your statement (and your insult) which makes justifying it your responsibility. I will also remind you that we're in the Physical & Life Sciences Forum where we discuss science in a scientific context as opposed to conducting debates on religious interpretations of science.
I'm sure we all await your science-based explanation of:
with considerable interest.
OB
NoYou don't get off that easily either. First explain to me what you think taxonomy is, and then I'll insult it in more detail.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?