Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Junk DNA

Expand Messages
  • Mike Doran
    Junk DNA and Gaia ... http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/evolution/blfaq_evolution_eviden ce12.htm Junk DNA Among many examples of genetic homologies, the
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 8, 2003
      Junk DNA and Gaia

      ce12.htm Junk DNA
      "Among many examples of genetic homologies, the most interesting are
      in what is frequently termed junk DNA. Junk DNA are basically pieces
      of DNA that have no function (or in some cases, such as introns, they
      produce no protein but may be involved in regulation of the gene).
      When the DNA is transcribed, these pieces of DNA either do not get
      transcribed at all or are only partially transcribed, with no final
      result (i.e., a functional protein) being produced. You can cut out
      or modify most of this junk DNA without affecting the organism.

      There are several varieties of junk DNA including pseudogenes,
      introns, transposons and retroposons. In many organisms (such as
      human beings) the vast majority of their DNA is of the junk variety.
      As an example, in humans there is one particular family of junk DNA
      called Alu sequences that are repeated some million times or so, and
      this one family alone accounts for about 5% of our DNA. There are
      numerous other examples.

      What's more, with much of this junk DNA we can make pretty good
      guesses as to how it came to be. A lot of it (such as pseudogenes)
      appears to be copies of other pieces of DNA that have mutated such
      that they are no longer functional. There are a variety of mutations
      that can result in non-functional genetic code, so junk DNA
      essentially represents errors in our DNA.

      Why is junk DNA so interesting? An analogy from the courts may prove
      useful here. Proving that someone has copied copyrighted material can
      sometimes be difficult, as in some cases you would expect the
      material to be similar since it covers the same topic or comes from
      the same sources. For example, phone number databases would be
      expected to be very similar since they contain the same basic

      However, one excellent way to determine whether something has been
      copied is if the errors in the source have been copied as well. While
      you could argue that, even if highly unlikely, the material is
      similar because it has similar function, it is very hard to explain
      why some material would have exactly the same errors as some other
      material if it were not copied. Companies that sell products such as
      phone lists or maps routinely insert fake listings to protect
      themselves from copyright violations.

      The same can be said of DNA. It is hard enough to explain (if you
      don't accept evolution) why some functional pieces of DNA show great
      similarities. It is pretty much impossible to rationally explain why
      nonfunctional DNA, erroneous DNA, would be very similar between
      different species. Why would genetic code that doesn't do anything
      and which clearly appears to be the result of mutations be similar,
      or in many cases identical, between different organisms? The only
      explanation that makes any sense is if this DNA was inherited from a
      common ancestor. Homologies between junk DNA are probably the most
      powerful of the homology evidence for common descent, as common
      descent is the only rational explanation for them.

      There are many examples of homologies between junk DNA, a number of
      which can be found in Zeus Thibault's Proof of Macroevolution series.
      We will address but a few of them here.

      Pseudogene equivalents are genes which are identifiable as some
      functional gene in another organism but which have a mutation which
      has rendered them nonfunctional. There are three sets of genes found
      in many species that have pseudogene equivalents in primates,
      including humans. They are:

      several odorant receptor genes,
      the RT6 protein gene, and
      the galatosyl transferase gene.
      The mutations which made these genes inoperable are shared among the
      primates. It is important to keep firmly in mind that there are
      numerous mutations that can render a gene nonfunctional. Yet not only
      do primates have pseudogene versions of these genes that are
      functional in other creatures, but these pseudogenes have been made
      nonfunctional by the same mutations - they have the exact same errors
      in the genes. This makes perfect sense if this genetic material was
      inherited from a common ancestor. Creationists have yet to come up
      with a rational alternative explanation.

      Summary of Biochemical Homologies

      The biochemical homologies offer some of the strongest homology
      evidence for common descent. This is due the universal existence of
      some homologies across all life forms, as well as the large number of
      possible biochemical alternatives that life forms could have used,
      but didn't. While all homologies support the idea of common descent,
      some biochemical homologies such as those in junk DNA provide
      especially strong evidence, since their very nature makes it
      exceedingly unlikely that they would exist for any functional reason.
      Common descent offers a meaningful explanation for these homologies."


      There are two main aspects of a living earth, the cirrus cloud part,
      and the ocean part. The cirrus clouds in pre cellular earth would
      have contained nucleotides in such manner as they would 1) replicate
      and 2) have an electrcical to mass meaning. IOWs, if rain
      feedbacks/convection feedbacks caused "nutrients" to be available on
      the ocean surface below, such that the nucleotides could both
      reproduce and reproduce with a meaningful mass and charge, you would
      have a good feedback. Below in the oceans the nucleotides would
      contain chemistry over chaotic diffusion of chemicals but that
      containment was probably not all that significant on conductivities
      like cellular life is today.

      Junk DNA was anything but junk to cirrus cloud formations in pre
      cellular earth. The function of the DNA was not to produce proteins
      or regulate or translate them, but rather the nucleotide function was
      simply to provide an electrical feedback to convection processes that
      occur w/ cirrus clouds that can trap heat, compress air and cause
      rain over ambiant, lifeless winds and climate inputs. The feedback is
      quite powerful, additionally, because of phase change energies on the
      DNA particles, forming or not, in cloud nucliation processes bring to
      cloud dynamics signiicant forcings.


      Dielectrics and cloud dynamics.

      Most are familiar with the fact that thunder clouds tend to bring
      negative voltages to ground and fair weather, a lower but positive
      voltage to ground. The whole thing is powered by the charge
      separations that bring positive voltages to the ionosphere from the
      thunderstorm clouds and that positive voltage then makes the lower
      ionsphere positively charged as a whole, and then this positive
      voltage moves to ground in fair weather. However, what isn't wel
      understood is how over tropical storms there is a large negative
      voltage that impact the cirrus cloud behaviors. What isn't understood
      is that the dielectric constant of water is about 80 times
      stronger and with tropical storms, where there is a capacitive
      coupling between ionosphere and ocean, the "eye" of the storm allows
      the capacitive coupling to occur whereas over the cirrus disk around
      the "eye" the high dielectric of water prevents an alternating
      current to pass by capacitance. The result is few strikes in a
      tropical storm and a pattern of EMFs and circuitry that favors the
      formation of cirrus disks and convections that tropical storms are
      known for.


      The largest problem facing self replicating life, of course, is
      keeping the chemistry (eg pH, nearby strikes and essential chemicals)
      available. That is because without cell walls any kind of chemistry,
      pH or temperature condition that would break down the nucleotides
      would then stop the replications.

      Gaia turns out to be local in that large scale low frequency ion
      waves are connected by hydrology to larger water bodies and the
      action takes place best along the idea that convective activity is
      going to attract dust particles from fair weather zones nearby. Fair
      and perhaps dry periods where the water dries up and leaves the
      nucleotides to blow as dust in the wind, and gather fair weather
      positive charges, and then be attracted to areas of convection.
      These functions all have to fit in terms of modulating chemistry and
      temperature and pH, such that what washes down the hydrology to where
      the nucleotides are created matches with what happens to the
      nucleotides in cirrus clouds and convection dynamics.

      The cirrus cloud dynamic also helps explain how early life could have
      covered the entire globe, moving quickly to places that had the
      proper conditions to support replication, drying and reinsertion in
      the cirrus.

      Later, as cellular life began to contain chemstries by themselves, a
      more ocean based conductivity model could emerge and the
      extremophiles or the archae could emerge with the junk DNA unloaded
      for metabolic efficiency. Conductivity was then managed by the fact
      that the cell itself was more conductive and the hydrates from the
      methanogens was more electrcially insulative. Chemistry was further
      maintained contained by location because unlike dust which can blow
      great distances the large scale electricall fields associated with
      hydrate formations and biogenic increases in conductivies were more
      localized. Tectonic processes like subduction of an ocean plate
      underneath a land plate, in so scrapping off sediments and building
      coastal mountains, would cause further re-erosion by rivers right
      back into the marine biosphere where the cellular life flourished,
      and by maintained chemistry, could continue to flourish with minor
      adjustments and movements. Soon this new, evolved efficiency did not
      allow for simple nucleotide replication, and a modified
      cirrus "electropheresis" movement occurred by sexual reproduction,
      and things like greenery and pollen and so forth would have their
      climate modulating impact on the clouds and living earth feedbacks.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.