Ancient virus DNA in animal genomes

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Here's yet another challenge for creationists, who claim that current species do not share common ancestors, but are results of independent creation events.



Traces of ancient viruses which infected our ancestors millions of years ago are more widespread in us than previously thought.

A study shows how extensively viruses from as far back as the dinosaur era still thrive in our genetic material.




The scientists investigated the genomes of 38 mammals including humans, mice, rats, elephants and dolphins.

One of the viruses was found to have invaded the genome of a common ancestor around 100 million years ago with its remnants discovered in almost every mammal in the study.

Another infected an early primate with the result that it was found in apes, humans and other primates as well.

The work established that many of these viruses lost the ability to transfer from one cell to another.

Instead they evolved to stay within their host cell where they have profilerated very effectively - spending their entire life cycle within the cell.


BBC article


Original paper from PNAS (open access)

Abstract:


Endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) differ from typical retroviruses in being inherited through the host germline and therefore are a unique combination of pathogen and selfish genetic element. Some ERV lineages proliferate by infecting germline cells, as do typical retro- viruses, whereas others lack the env gene required for virions to enter cells and thus behave like retrotransposons. We wished to know what factors determined the relative abundance of different ERV lineages, so we analyzed ERV loci recovered from 38 mammal genomes by in silico screening. By modeling the relationship be- tween proliferation and replication mechanism in detail within one group, the intracisternal A-type particles (IAPs), and performing sim- ple correlations across all ERV lineages, we show that when ERVs lose the env gene their proliferation within that genome is boosted by a factor of ∼30. We also show that ERV abundance follows the Pareto principle or 20/80 rule, with ∼20% of lineages containing 80% of the loci. This rule is observed in many biological systems, including in- fectious disease epidemics, where commonly ∼20% of the infected individuals are responsible for 80% of onward infection. We thus borrow simple epidemiological and ecological models and show that retrotransposition and loss of env is the trait that leads endogenous retroviruses to becoming genomic superspreaders that take over a significant proportion of their host’s genome.




posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Rationalwiki supporting this claim.

Also DonExodus2 references them a lot in his videos. He's the one who familiarized me with them first. I don't have the time to pick out his best video that explains them at this moment though.

This is something you'll never hear a creationists source make mention of. Quite simply, they have no explanation, so they just pretend it's not there(Like most other evidence of Common Decent we have). That being said, I wholly support drawing attention to these retroviruses, science should be known and understood, not swept under the rug as unsavory for an ideology.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   
God put them there six thousand years ago to test the faithful and confound the wicked.

Come on now, how hard was that?



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
God put them there six thousand years ago to test the faithful and confound the wicked.

Ah, it's like fossil record then.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


or maybe everything was designed to look like and behave like it had no designer.

....that is the true test of faith..



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Wertdagf
 

1. Create everything
2. Hide your existence completely by making it seem like you never existed.
3. Plant evidence to the contrary.
4. Condemn people who don't believe into your existence into eternal torture.
edit on 24-4-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:09 PM
link   
Or maybe "God" just put the entire universe into motion and sat back until we showed up?



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArrowsNV
Or maybe "God" just put the entire universe into motion and sat back until we showed up?


That's not the creationist stance. This topic is aimed at the standard creationsts ideology, and how it doesn't match the objective facts we have.

A belief that is meant to match all the facts, but add a violation to Occams Razor to the beginning, is not at all what this topic is addressing.
edit on 24-4-2012 by xxsomexpersonxx because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   
So exactly how are they proving these existed MILLIONS of years ago? No proof that the Earth is even millions of years old.

Guess it's just a test of Faith.



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by 4REVOLUTION
 


No proof that the Earth is even millions of years old.

That's right, it was created in a flash of light six thousand years ago with a 4.5-billion-year history written into its rocks to confuse people. God likes His little joke.

edit on 25/4/12 by Astyanax because: of a little joke.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
That's right, it was created in a flash of light six thousand years ago with a 4.5-billion-year history written into its rocks to confuse people. God likes His little joke.

edit on 25/4/12 by Astyanax because: of a little joke.


LOL.

Actually what I find interesting is all the talk of "ancient ancestors" dating back millions & billions of years, yet it's a known fact that historical records only go back as far as 4000 B.C. [absolute limit], with most agreeing 3000 B.C. to be the cutoff.

Now, these are your common known atheist and/or evolutionary scientists agreeing on this. They say evolution started Millions of years ago and we [humans] stopped evolving around 100,000yrs ago. This of course makes no sense as we have no historical records of any civilizations past 6000yrs ago [4000 B.C.].

So the evolutionary theory just kinda jumps around here and there with no real proof to test anything... it's all in the past.


If only rocks could talk...
edit on 4/26/2012 by 4REVOLUTION because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by 4REVOLUTION
Actually what I find interesting is all the talk of "ancient ancestors" dating back millions & billions of years, yet it's a known fact that historical records only go back as far as 4000 B.C. [absolute limit], with most agreeing 3000 B.C. to be the cutoff.

Not true.



Now, these are your common known atheist and/or evolutionary scientists agreeing on this. They say evolution started Millions of years ago and we [humans] stopped evolving around 100,000yrs ago.

Stopped evolving? Really? Please provide a citation from a credible biologist who says that we "stopped evolving". You will do no such thing, as no credible biologist would say such a thing. You don't stop a force of nature from happening.



This of course makes no sense as we have no historical records of any civilizations past 6000yrs ago [4000 B.C.].

You're so ignorant. What about e.g. Göbekli Tepe, the oldest known megalithic structure, about 12,000 years old.



So the evolutionary theory just kinda jumps around here and there with no real proof to test anything... it's all in the past.


To you the fact that there are no 100,000 year old human cities means that time did not exist 100,000 years ago? What nice logic you have there! Contrary to your claim, there are numerous independent ways we can use to determine the age of things (e.g. real proofs).

Anyway, back to creationist nightmare, i.e. undeniable proof of common ancestry..



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by rhinoceros
 


Wow. Someone is upset.
Proof this megalithic structure is 12,000yrs old? Proof that Lucy isn't just some chicken bones someone buried in the ground?

Radiocarbon dating is JOKE! Carbondate my new Nikes. I'm sure they'll show they're 12,000yrs old.

Did I mention Creationism? Nope.

Thank you for proving ignorance is bliss Mr. Scientist.
edit on 4/26/2012 by 4REVOLUTION because: (no reason given)



*EDIT* BTW, I know all about Göbekli Tepe. It's not 12,000yrs old. Any 10yr old in basic science can tell you the sediment covering it can't be 12,000yrs old as the formation and lack of hardened rock from which it was uncovered shows evidence of it being left by a large flood.... Ooooh, creationism strikes again!

edit on 4/26/2012 by 4REVOLUTION because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4REVOLUTION
reply to post by rhinoceros
 


Wow. Someone is upset.
Proof this megalithic structure is 12,000yrs old? Proof that Lucy isn't just some chicken bones someone buried in the ground?

Radiocarbon dating is JOKE! Carbondate my new Nikes. I'm sure they'll show they're 12,000yrs old.

Did I mention Creationism? Nope.

Thank you for proving ignorance is bliss Mr. Scientist.
edit on 4/26/2012 by 4REVOLUTION because: (no reason given)


If you're done with your hissy fit now, could you please provide some evidence to back up your assertions instead of snide remarks?



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by HappyBunny
If you're done with your hissy fit now, could you please provide some evidence to back up your assertions instead of snide remarks?


What hissy fit? I asked Rhino for Proof.


Funny how you Evolutionists can't actually provide any concrete evidence MacroEvolution exists, and have to go through ridiculous loopholes to prove theories, yet when someone asks you to simply provide said proof, you discredit them with no solid evidence to backup your own statements.

Just doing what you do to all Creationist threads.



Now, when you're done with your snide remarks, please provide some of your own proof as you're obviously in the train of thought as Rhino.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4REVOLUTION
Thank you for proving ignorance is bliss Mr. Scientist.


You refuse you to accept scientific fact because it contradicts the myths you were brainwashed to believe into. That's about as ignorant as it gets. Talking snakes, yeah they exists or existed for sure, it says so in your book! Carbon dating, nono, that's BS because it contradicts your book's creation myth, just like millions of other observed facts. It's fascinating how your brains manage to turn fact into fiction and vice versa, but that's what brainwashing does. Your brains are broken.

p.s. Whales have hipbones and numerous finger bones. Why? If their ancestors never walked on land, then how come they have hipbones? Why the finger bones? Fish don't have finger bones. If whales were always whales, then why we don't find really old whale fossils? Instead, we find something like this. Why?
edit on 26-4-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4REVOLUTION

Originally posted by HappyBunny
If you're done with your hissy fit now, could you please provide some evidence to back up your assertions instead of snide remarks?


What hissy fit? I asked Rhino for Proof.


Which he provided. It's not his problem if you think everything that doesn't conform to what you believe in is a lie perpetrated by the Big Bad Scientists.


Now, when you're done with your snide remarks, please provide some of your own proof as you're obviously in the train of thought as Rhino.


Rhino and others have already done so. I'm not getting into a battle of wits with an unarmed person.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   
Wow, just wow. I was actually hopeful when a creationist entered this thread. I thought maybe we'd actually hear an attempt at explanation for this. But no, instead we have incoherent assertions on irrelevant topics, none of which offering an explanation on the issue.

Hey, 4REVOLUTION, I have a challenge for you. Offer an explanation for these endogenous retroviruses, AKA, have an on topic response.

I've never seen an argument for intelligent design, only (bunk) arguments against evolution, am I the only one who's noticed this pattern? This topic isn't even asking for you to provide a single argument, it's asking for a single explanation on how this could even remotely be possible without common decent.

~

P.S. I thought your first post was a sarcastic joke, and I still suspect you're being a Poe here. Though you seem fervent enough in your wild claims that it's obvious you at the very least want people to think you mean what you're saying.
edit on 26-4-2012 by xxsomexpersonxx because: Format



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 11:50 PM
link   
reply to post by 4REVOLUTION
 


What I find interesting is all the talk of "ancient ancestors" dating back millions & billions of years, yet it's a known fact that historical records only go back as far as 4000 B.C. [absolute limit], with most agreeing 3000 B.C. to be the cutoff... So the evolutionary theory just kinda jumps around here and there with no real proof to test anything... it's all in the past.

I completely agree. If something isn't written down, it never happened. The universe did not exist until human beings learnt to read and write.

It says so right there in the Bible: 'In the beginning was the Word.'

edit on 26/4/12 by Astyanax because: creationists are so intelligent.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by xxsomexpersonxx
I've never seen an argument for intelligent design, only (bunk) arguments against evolution, am I the only one who's noticed this pattern?


No. They're trying to "win" by default--if they can prove evolution wrong, then creationism/ID is automatically the correct explanation.

Which is, of course, a false dichotomy, but try explaining that to them.

edit on 4/27/2012 by HappyBunny because: (no reason given)


ETA: Retroviruses are nasty little buggers and if God created everything, well, he sure didn't have our well-being in his best interest. If he did, he wouldn't have given us reverse transcriptase either, which is what makes infection by retroviruses possible.
edit on 4/27/2012 by HappyBunny because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join