IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

modelling intelligence

Brian zhil at online.no
Sun Jul 1 08:44:47 EST 2001

"John H" <John at faraway.com.au> skrev i melding
news:qDB%6.256$GL5.12371 at ozemail.com.au...
> Not bad indeed Brian but my reference to being in deep shit was not with
> respect to physics but with respect to the fact that if science can be so
> easily manipulated then we're all in .... .

You see, this is what I see is happening right now with genetics.
As I have stated another place, all animals on Earth has very much in common
especially in the amount of ACGT (genetic letters, I won't spell them out as
would occupy tremendous place here).
Between humans and Chimpanzee's the same amount of 'letters' is in the range
of 97%.
But that's function-wise, we both have arms, legs, heads, eyes and ears.
But it is the total composition that decides how the result would appear,
the amount of letters.
And here's the fraud.
Since Chimps and humans are such close together, are we the same thing ?
They might say yes, I say No.
How about between humans with a difference in THE AMOUNT of 99.5% ?
They say 'since the difference in the amount amounts to almost nothing,
all the same'.
I say 'No, because we would STILL have the arrangement of the letters, the
usage of the functions would generate different results.
Some slight, maybe not even detectable with our technology at this level,
others would be very difficult to hide'.
One example should show you quite graphically what I mean.
Say we have the array of amino acids like this:
leu (TTA) -arg-phe-cys-ala....... etc it is not the same as
isoleu (ATT) -arg-phe-cys-ala....... eve if just ONE letter changed place
BTW.Genetics is extremely interesting, to say the least.

> The Zionists who supported Einstein must have been bitterly disappointed
> when he refused the offer to be the first leader of the New Israel.

They chose another, and he'd shown himself that he knew he was a better star
than politician.

> You can't threaten that many people and I have read too many accounts by
> scientists praising Einstein. Anyway, what about Russian scientists ...
> many of them Zakaharov for instance, didn't come out against him. Even the
> manipulators couldn't penetrate into the iron curtain.

Well, yes you can threaten a lot of people.
Try saying to yourself if you were accused of the mortal sin of today, that
really doesn't matter.............................very few would do that.
It's far more comfortable to just blabbering the party-line and keep your
mouth shut.
They did this to a certain degree behind the curtain, but as in everything
else we westerners are more efficient......
Andrei Sakharov (I think it's spell like this), was in housearrest for a
long periode
of time - why ?
He was a brilliant physicist, and a dissident at that, but he was lucky he
wasn't shot.
And he didn't give the west any information of the Soviet nuclear-programme.
He was just a dissident......

> Yes, I've been threatened but I've got guts.

Tell you what, state something racist in public, and I'll guarantee you that
you won't know what hit you (you don't even have to believe what you say).
Even by stating the obvious will do that (as the example I provided above
with the difference in the arrangement of genetic letters will produce very
great differences).

> You are correct Brian, this doesn't belong here, but thanks for the
> discussion. The issue is not closed for me, just playing Devil's advocate
> but I still have great difficulty in some cosmic conspiracy on this scale.

I don't like the word conspiracy as I'm seeing some wild-eyed nut believing
that everybody is after him.
No, it's more like a minority pushing the majority.
That have happened since the dawn of time.

> By the way, one of Einstein's central planks, that the speed of light is
> constant, is now in serious dispute. Some research early 2000.

Well, that is good news and bad news.
Bad news, since how will we be able to decide if the universe are expanding
(the red-shift in the EM-spectrum).
Good news since we might be able (maybe not in the near future) to develope
detailed theories of how the universe functions.

> Regards,
> John H.


More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net