It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
We found that ~15% of human codons are dual-use codons (“duons”) that simultaneously specify both amino acids and TF recognition sites.
...Scientists have discovered a second code hiding within DNA. This second code contains information that changes how scientists read the instructions contained in DNA and interpret mutations to make sense of health and disease...
...many DNA changes that appear to alter protein sequences may actually cause disease by disrupting gene control programs or even both mechanisms simultaneously
Keep this in mind, and than think about Monsanto and Gmo...
We are modifying with out any knowledge of the potential side effects, we are modifying DNA when we just discovered this?
Something that could be a major component in the out come...
Is this true?! Would we now have to embrace intelligent design if we're intellectually honest?
Well, there is somewhat of an oxymoron here, but it resides in the paradox of the linked article as I'll explain in a minute. That is, when 'oxymoron' is used correctly, which you didn't.
Design would always denote intelligence, so that's not an oxymoron even by your misusage. "Intellectual honesty" is a well-recognized phrase that has a decided meaning. Thusly, I hesitate to explain myself to someone with so little grasp of language and inference.
I'll give it a shot, however, because I feel sorry for you.
The University of Washington--UoW being an academic institution--has chosen words such as, "meaning," "code," "write," and "instructions' as descriptors in the linked article.
Those are suggestive and heavy-duty words. You shouldn't need as much of a lesson on their impact as you seem to on the definition of oxymoron---though I could be wrong on that. Read 'em again if you're still lost. It'll hit ya.
Philosophically--and with Occam's in mind--I would further proffer that the idea that this particular and most spectacular of creative forces--DNA--stems from something less than "consciousness" is negated in that we don't even have--at least as far as the University of Washington is concerned--words that don't imply design when describing the theorem. Design, as you'll remember from above, suggests intelligence.
Son of Will
If I may, the gentleman was saying that there is nothing specific to this discovery which would cause the scientific consensus in Theory of Evolution to abandon that theory, and jump ship to Intelligent Design. Your comment suggested that there was. As if to say "Due to this discovery, and because of the language used by the authors of this academic article, it is now intellectually honest to subscribe to Intelligent Design". xDdeadcowX pointed out, correctly, that this is not a logical statement.
PS, your threads rule.
Reading through the postings so far, there seem to be an awfully large number of people ready to throw out everything we know so far on the topic of DNA... and all based on one single press release.
Because thats all this is.
One single press release from the university, advertising their publication in Science.
Details are thin. But what it appears to be saying is that :
- most everything we know so far *stays the same*
- some codons also "appear to stabilise certain beneficial features of proteins and how they are made".
The idea that DNA sequences not only code for proteins, but also code for gene control is not news. This has been known for decades. What the paper appears to be saying (based on the press release) is that some elements within the introns can also function as control data.
I'd like to see more detail than a press release though.
reply to post by pandersway
AKA as the "double helix of meaning".
The more you know, the less you'll understand.
Thanks for posting.
Come on guys you don't really think the amazing medical and life enhancing possibilities of this discovery will actually be used to help us simple folk do you?
No no, we can all sleep easy knowing that only the super rich and elite can even think to afford such treatment.
There is zero supporting evidence for this God you trying to claim designed DNA and there is zero evidence to support DNA being designed in the first place.