Strange set of comments. Why so much defensiveness? I asked why the discovery was important. It was only a question. It wasn't an implied assertion that it wasn't important. All I wanted was an intuitive explanation for why it was important. And in fact the paragraph that I quoted in my second post was the sort of answer I was looking for.
It may seem "blatantly obvious to [Glen] that the substitution of As for P in DNA is important," It wasn't to me, which is why I asked. Also the article Glen pointed to didn't say that As was substituted for P in DNA in particular. Nor was the paragraph Glen quotes in that article--not that I would have understood it anyway. I would still have asked what that means to a layman and why it matters. Nor does saying that it's as important as the first rock that fall upward would be important physically answer the question of why it's important. It's just an assertion that it is important. So my question now is why did such a simple and straightforward question elicited such defensive responses. *-- Russ * * * *P.S. I don't get the any gradient in a storm joke. Yes, I know that life has to do with gradients, but how is that related to this issue?* On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 7:35 PM, Nicholas Thompson < [email protected]> wrote: > I would say it’s about as important biololgically as the first rock that > falls up would be important physically! > > > > n > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On > Behalf Of *Roger Critchlow > *Sent:* Thursday, December 02, 2010 6:03 PM > > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] NASA-Funded Research Discovers Life Built With > Toxic Chemical > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 4:39 PM, glen e. p. ropella <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > [*] FWIW, I find it odd for you to ask, of this particular article, "why > is this important?" Of all the obscure, mumbo-jumbo journal articles > out there (our discussion of PoMo aside ;-), it seems blatantly obvious > to me that the substitution of As for P in DNA is important, even if we > don't know what the implications are. I am woefully ignorant of the > literature, though. Is it fairly common to find and report substitutes > for DNA components? > > > > No, it's not common, it's never been reported before, all DNA and RNA in > life as we have known it up until today has been based on phospho-esters. > > > > -- rec -- > > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
