It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Alien Genes Found in Human DNA

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by itscocobaby
 


Sorry but untill they demonstrate exacty how our (junk DNA) has been influenced then this is just assumption.


edit on 22/4/11 by KrypticCriminal because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by chiefsmom
Crap! Does this mean David Icke is right?
Wait, yeah, how do they know? Do they have something to compare it to?
Is this proof that aliens do exist?
Wait, we would be the aliens!

I am so confused!
lol we are



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 


If you read the ATS thread I linked to, it was discovered that there is a professor Chang who is a genetic scientist but he has never worked on the human genome project.

This is a classic hoax technique, using a genuine person in your report and most people will not check out whether that person did actually say what they were reported as saying in the article. He has published papers which can be traced and none of them are about discovering the ET origins of junk DNA.

You are right, contacting Dr Chang might clear this up but I think the fact that you would need some Et DNA in the first place in order to make these claims makes this a no-brainer for me.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 


If you read the ATS thread I linked to, it was discovered that there is a professor Chang who is a genetic scientist but he has never worked on the human genome project.

This is a classic hoax technique, using a genuine person in your report and most people will not check out whether that person did actually say what they were reported as saying in the article. He has published papers which can be traced and none of them are about discovering the ET origins of junk DNA.

You are right, contacting Dr Chang might clear this up but I think the fact that you would need some Et DNA in the first place in order to make these claims makes this a no-brainer for me.

edit on 22-4-2011 by DrHammondStoat because: Double Post?!



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by DrHammondStoat
 


I will check out but at the Wiley book site, Chang is listed as a contributor. I have to run. here is the link:

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

Not saying he said what the OP article says but..... the book price is too steep for me to see if he put it in there.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 


I'm sure that book was covered in previous ATS threads and it's more like an encyclopedia than anything else, obvioulsy we wouldn't know for sure without reading it.

Well here's an overview of what Chang studied from the university of British Columbia's website.



Doctor of Philosophy (Medical Genetics) * Dr. Chia-Yu Samuel Chang: "Dr. Chang studied the silencing of genes on the human X chromosome. He identified DNA sequences with potential regulatory roles in gene silencing and argued that the established mouse model system does not reflect the human scenario. This research provides novel directions to future studies of human X-chromosome inactivation."


www.grad.ubc.ca...


I'm not the most scientific person but this seems to indicate he wasn't studying junk DNA, or it's ET origin, he was studying DNA that is involved in coding. Also if you consider that the human genome project finished in 2003, why did this story come out originally in 2007? Where are Changs research papers about his ET discovery?


edit on 22-4-2011 by DrHammondStoat because: ,



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by believer74
 


If you simply use google to look into these questions (that you seem to so desperately want to have a certain outcome) you will find many, many way more plausible, scientifically explainable reasons that answer your questions before running straight to the least likely, and frankly absurd, answers just because that's cooler to you if those were true.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 08:33 PM
link   
I was talking to a guy recently who is a DNA scientist. I brought up the question of junk DNA, he agreed it exists, so I asked how much, he told me about 90% is junk. So I said, if that is the case then, only approx 10% of DNA is 'real'. He agreed. So then I asked, If 'he' were in trouble in a court case, and his life sentence depended on DNA evidence would he be happy with approx 10% proof of evidence.

I never heard a man stop talking so fast and trying to back track in all my life.

Oh. I love being a little bit inquisitive. That was a result :-)

Peace



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 08:37 PM
link   
Wasn't the OP's link a blog entry? Sure looks like it.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by CastleMadeOfSand
 


Right, it's just one word. They are using it correctly also, in a sense.

If they wanted to be specific to the idea it's possibly extraterrestrial DNA, they would say that.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join