Notices
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Gene therapy and its connection to evolution

  1. #1 Gene therapy and its connection to evolution 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    52
    Hi my name is Ivan Nanev and I'm writhing about what I've discovered proving further my theory and questioning the "evolution theory". I call it "Gene Index" - it's a UNIQUE marker for EVERY gene, meaning that every gene no matter what genome we are talking about is labeled. Meaning that my deploying theory is right and proves that we are not a result of random mutations or matching. The Gene_Index is consisted of the tree codons before the gene (xxx) and the tree codons after the gene (yyy), also called “sticky ends”. If for instance you give me the xxxyyy I can tell you with 100% accuracy the size of the gene, 100% accuracy the if it's going on the positive or the negative DNA strain and statistically 97.9% accurately return you the gene you are talking about and tell you in which genomes is also spotted. Further today or tomorrow I’ll make SQL query page available to the web to explain this fenomenom.

    I'll be happy to give example to anybody !

    More about my theory on:
    http://www.cyber-indian.com/theory/index.html


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    52
    All I need you is to give me the (3 codons) 9 Nucleotides before ATG and 9 Nucleotides after TAG meaning the gene lpg0932 in genome NC_002942_5 have "AAAAAAAAA" after that is ATG and just after TGA is "ACTTTATGC".
    It would look like this "AAAAAAAAA ATGAGCATAGT ... TGGCGAAGTTTGA ACTTTATGC". The "AAAAAAAAAACTTTATGC" is the gene_index - you give me that I can give you the whole gene sequence you have picked. Now you have to remember that i have sequenced only the NCBI "Genome" Database and haven't sequenced any stanalone genes so far. Just give it a try.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    61
    So what your also saying is that there are a maximum of 687194767360 possible genes?(4 to the power of 18 )
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    61
    I read your site and it explains nothing about what your post is about.

    Also, even if we are on this planet because other lifeforms brought the DNA here, it does not exclude evolution, which can and has been observed and how would you explain the development of such being in the first place?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    1. Please cite a single piece of evidence in support of your hypothesis that life on Earth did not evolve, but was advanced by gene manipulation by 'others'. [If I have misunderstood the main thrust of your hypothesis, then please clarify it.]
    2. How is this gene manupulation carried out?
    3. Should you not give at least some credit to Hoyle and Wickramasinghe?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    Perhaps he was refering to gene mutations?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    52
    I don't have time right now to exactly answer so I'm gonna coppy answer form another forum I made. I'll be back in 3 hours to answer.


    "There is still a process, but it's not exactly a "natural selection". Second I'm getting to the BASICS of the process and after you get what I'm saying we can argue for the outcome not the other way around.
    The six codons is just a part of the mechanism to accumulate the right set of genes in specific genome, after that there's another mechanism to mold them acording to the enviroment - ensuring survival of the specie. Have you ever wander whay we have HERVs ?"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    52
    This post is update on the theory - part of the appending genes process. After a vector/phage have found it's way to the right genome cell by means of cell surface receptors, there is still danger that the gene will fall in the middle of another gene and by that way disturb the genome functioning. That's where the gene_index comes in place.
    Second the idea is that we are on this planet because of US (our past us to be exact, the same way our parnts are to us) not "other liveforms". And I'm writing about how we can or we've been resettled not "which one is first the chicken or the egg".
    The evidence itself that every gene has UNIQUE index contradict the "natural selection". The whole resettle process is just matter of ingenuity not "manipulation by others".
    About Hoyle & Wickramasinghe I havn't read much about them exept the definition of Panspermia and hopefully that will help people accept the theory more easily.
    There are two totaly different kind of gene mutations - destructive (carcinogenous) and self molding (organism adaptation).
    687194767360 possibilities yes compared to the human 40,000 genes and similarities between different species.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    945
    :? confusing stuff

    i looked briefly at your site, havne,t had the time yet to read it all.

    but Q> your saying our dnA were placed here by aliens, (well aliens .. but if we were placed here by them, we are decendant form em, so not aliens really!) becasue they're planet was being destroyed?

    if so, do you sugggest we are geniticlay identical at this moment??
    or have we evolved from the dna placed here?
    Stumble on through life.
    Feel free to correct any false information, which unknown to me, may be included in my posts. (also - let this be a disclaimer)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    52
    It's a theory how we could or how we've been resettled and it's something that should be considered in case something bad happend in our world.

    But there is no guarantee the next world should be the same as our started, so molding to the enviroment we should have in mind ... the same molding also will be needed for the steps of deployment/evolving.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    945
    its a flawed theory
    say they planted the dna. if they were devolped enough to do it, then wouldn't the dna be devolped? then how come we didn't just start off as devolped? surely if they mimicied their own , dna, we would be theres+evolution, adaptation ect, = better,
    and yet we are still jsut us, only figuring ou the whole dna thing!

    make sense? :?
    Stumble on through life.
    Feel free to correct any false information, which unknown to me, may be included in my posts. (also - let this be a disclaimer)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    2,116
    C-I: Is it possible this alien who deposited the dna was named Coyote?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    52
    Goodgod3rd what's the point if we get born as 80 years old men ? The point of live is to give something to the world or work. Remember the Matrix movie talking that the first version of the matrix was perfect, everybody equal and the guy saying that it didn't work - What's the point to live if everything has been done ?

    >if so, do you sugggest we are geniticlay identical at this moment??
    or have we evolved from the dna placed here?
    The GENERAL PRIORITY will be to make sure the continuing of the species making sure that newborn will survive no matter what the conditions are. So you work on the flexibility more than the identical part. This way depenfind how differen the enviroment have outcomed, that different we will be - does this makes sence ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    945
    ah, see the question of life. the meaning of life!

    well i suppose it could be possible , but i still sticking to the proven theory of evolution, but it could be proved wrong in the future!!! jsut liek the church was! adn ya never know it could be you that dose,

    i always open to new ideas! i will read you site in more detail!

    now, what i meant was.. if the intellegent species that put us here was trying to preserve themselfs, it dosen't make sense that they would jsut hope for the best! everyone knows, that one small differecne in the chromosome could cause a genetic difference ... to our lives, that is why we are all so different! if they were trying to preserve them selfs, they would have to of been sure of the being to be the same specis and not turn inot a pice of goup or slime!

    i bet im missing the point!!!
    Stumble on through life.
    Feel free to correct any false information, which unknown to me, may be included in my posts. (also - let this be a disclaimer)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by goodgod3rd
    ah, see the question of life. the meaning of life!
    now, what i meant was.. if the intellegent species that put us here was trying to preserve themselfs, it dosen't make sense that they would jsut hope for the best! everyone knows, that one small differecne in the chromosome could cause a genetic difference ... to our lives, that is why we are all so different! if they were trying to preserve them selfs, they would have to of been sure of the being to be the same specis and not turn inot a pice of goup or slime!
    i bet im missing the point!!!
    What I saying is that you put your copy, but changes can disrupt survival if you can't ADAPT.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    945
    see i missed the point!
    but still, adapation dose not go back wards! no?
    Stumble on through life.
    Feel free to correct any false information, which unknown to me, may be included in my posts. (also - let this be a disclaimer)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    52
    What do you mean go backwards ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by goodgod3rd
    but still, adapation dose not go back wards! no?
    Yes. I'd like an answer to that too. Your statement implies evolution has an overarching direction, which in conventional versions of evolution it does not.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    52
    Help me out here ... I don't know what you mean by backwards and overarching direction.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •