Junk is an unfortunate adjective- it sounds too random. My guess is
that further selection takes place in this area which selects the
strongest marker- or whatever it's called- such in the color of eyes,
hair, and other characteristics. There are also generational skips in
play. I have noted other strange echoes of a missing parent such as
the style of laughter which is a surprise and so many other
recognitions. At any rate, we are just beginning to sort through the
data in this one area as in others- I think it is called "big data"
which will overcome the religious notion of "sins of the father" stuff
as well as curses and fate and will hopefully allow a more rational
and postive approach/life choices for each unique individual. But it
will also cause mischief.

On Mar 22, 5:16 am, andrew vecsey <[email protected]> wrote:
> Not all DNA code for protein. We have non coding DNA called "junk DNA" that
> ensure we are all unique. While normal DNA codes for protein to make, for
> example a "nose", junk DNA ensures that we grow a nose that "looks" like a
> mixture of our father`s and our mother`s nose.
>
>
>
> On Friday, March 22, 2013 12:36:39 AM UTC+1, Ash wrote:
>
> > My thoughts didn't include "junk DNA", my thinking on such terms are
> > mixed in that some genes may not be useful or represent just another
> > failure point, but also that the supposed junk in one set of
> > circumstances may prove quite beneficial in others like a backup, an
> > alternate development chain or complex interdependencies we haven't
> > observed yet. You may have a connection in mind I haven't gleaned.
>
> > Developing the market sounds similar but I am trying to root out an
> > aspect of this that doesn't require jumping to a premature conclusion,
> > such as in 'intelligent design', materialism, rigid ontologies or
> > realism. Thanks for helping me explore here gabby, lets hope some form
> > emerges in expression. :)
>
> > On 3/21/2013 3:57 AM, gabbydott wrote:
> > > Now that sounds more like you. :)
> > > What you are describing or asking I now understand/interpret/hear in
> > > terms of what I know about what they are trying to find out about
> > > "junk DNA". Its purpose/function/added value. As for what you describe
> > > as another way, I know/experience/see this in what the companies
> > > describe as "developing the market". We are still on topic, aren't we?
>
> > > 2013/3/21 James <[email protected] <javascript:> <mailto:
> > [email protected] <javascript:>>>
>
> > >     I have a feeling you are being charitable with me gabby (cringe).
> > >     What you say makes sense, and should add that the intent I refer
> > >     to is in excess of that needed for mere gene survival fitness. In
> > >     that sense I consider the adaptations as simulations and the
> > >     excess as breaking the barriers of meta-simulation, or in another
> > >     way, not just running within time but operating on it by taking
> > >     advantage of the rules and finding ways to bend them. Now it is my
> > >     turn to ask, does that make sense [to anyone]?
>
> > >     On 3/20/2013 3:01 AM, gabbydott wrote:
>
> > >         I don't know if this is good or bad, but i hear that you
> > >         haven't just heard about mirror neurons, that this is a
> > >         relatively consciously made up construct, a construct with
> > >         intent or purpose. Also it sounds strange when you say that
> > >         this neurological mechanism is strange (to you). That's where
> > >         my "parallel mirror neurons" come into play, i compare what
> > >         you say with what i have heard you saying before and add the
> > >         info as well as my judgement on what you say to my internal
> > >         "Virtualization" of you. The leap is more of a constant
> > >         exercise of differentiating between you and me while operating
> > >         on the virtualization of each participant, so to speak. Does
> > >         that somehow make sense to you?
>
> > >         Of course, I could go back to the group website and search for
> > >         the real data on what you have been saying on neurological
> > >         mechanisms. But this would be a completely new project. I'd
> > >         have to go back and construct a new image with my knowledge of
> > >         now.
>
> > >         But since you are still alive and still communicating, I find
> > >         it much easier and more purposeful to keep on listening to
> > >         what you say, to respond to it, and to rely on you saying, if
> > >         you disagree. Not a good position for me to be in, more of a
> > >         survival strategy. Now that's worth a leap into rethinking
> > >         mode. ;)
>
> > >         2013/3/20 James <[email protected] <javascript:>
> > >         <mailto:[email protected] <javascript:>> <mailto:
> > [email protected] <javascript:>
> > >         <mailto:[email protected] <javascript:>>>>
>
> > >             My response was mostly a parallel narrative, my thinking on
> > a
> > >             personal level is when does a system of components
> > >         transcend the
> > >             boudaries of automata and begin to engage in the operations
> > of
> > >             intent. Where does gene fitness adaptation break loose into
> > >             something perceiving, interacting, understanding and
> > >         mastering? I
> > >             have heard that our ability to reflect and interact on an
> > >         intimate
> > >             level arises from a strange neurological mechanism called
> > >         mirror
> > >             neurons. If this is something like the virtualization
> > >         technologies
> > >             we have been building in technology then with a bit more
> > >         scale and
> > >             pondering our science may make the leap logarithmically.
>
> > >             On 3/18/2013 8:15 PM, James wrote:
>
> > >                 I see this sometimes too Andrew, and we learn how our
> > >         internal
> > >                 systems and culture drive and shape us, so we can
> > >         create. We
> > >                 model from the simplest sensory stimuli on to
> > >         reflections on
> > >                 the nature of our existence and what could be in a
> > >                 simultaneous simulation of reality. Our world can be
> > >         full of
> > >                 intent, or I should say we experience it thus due to our
> > >                 capacity arising from our nature and drawing parables
> > >         in the
> > >                 mist. It makes me wonder how many levels of abstraction,
> > >                 simulation and foresight are necessary to represent
> > >         the human
> > >                 element. That minds like ours are derived from nature is
> > >                 astonishing and awe inspiring, that we reach so far
> > >         and yet
> > >                 innocence is so fragile, the experience of awareness
> > >         is far
> > >                 from today's science I think. Our synthetic
> > >         counterparts or
> > >                 robots will have to wait.
>
> > >                 On 3/13/2013 5:35 AM, andrew vecsey wrote:
>
> > >                     Perhaps we are born into a world filled with
> > negative
> > >                     aspects rather than positive aspects so as to give
> > >         us a
> > >                     direction. We are born small so that we can grow.
> > >         We are
> > >                     born ignorant so that we could know. We are born
> > with
> > >                     negative aspects so that we could acquire positive
> > >         ones.
>
> > >                     On Monday, January 28, 2013 12:11:39 PM UTC+1,
> > andrew
> > >                     vecsey wrote:
>
> > >                         Why do so many of us remember negative
> > >         feelings easier
> > >                     than
> > >                         positive ones. Pain over pleasure. Bad news
> > >         over good
> > >                     news. Why
> > >                         does "bad" overshadow "good", immorality over
> > >                     morality, despair
> > >                         over hope, pessimism over optimism. Why does
> > hate
> > >                     appear to be
> > >                         more powerful than love? Why is greed louder
> > than
> > >                     generosity. Why
> > >                         is destruction of war so much faster than the
> > >         building
> > >                     power of
> > >                         peace. Why can one little lie destroy a
> > >         lifetime of
> > >                     trust. Why are
> > >                         lies more influential than truth. It all seems
> > >         so one
> > >                     sided. Why
> > >                         is that?
>
> > >                     --
> > >                     ---
> > >                     You received this message because you are
> > >         subscribed to
> > >                     the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
> > >                     To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving
> > >         emails
> > >                     from it, send an email to
> > >         [email protected] <javascript:>
> > >         <mailto:minds-eye%[email protected] <javascript:>>
> > >                     
> > > <mailto:minds-eye%[email protected]<javascript:>
> > >         <mailto:minds-eye%[email protected] 
> > > <javascript:>>>.
>
> > >                     For more options, visit
> > >        https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
> > >             --
> > >             --- You received this message because you are subscribed
> > >         to the
> > >             Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
> > >             To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
> > >         from it,
> > >             send an email to [email protected]<javascript:>
> > >         <mailto:minds-eye%[email protected] <javascript:>>
> > >             <mailto:minds-eye%[email protected]<javascript:>
> > >         <mailto:minds-eye%[email protected] 
> > > <javascript:>>>.
>
> > >             For more options, visit
> > >        https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
> > >         --
>
> > >         ---
> > >         You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> > >         Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
> > >         To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
> > >         it, send an email to [email protected]<javascript:>
> > >         <mailto:minds-eye%[email protected] <javascript:>>.
>
> > >         For more options, visithttps://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
> > >     --
>
> > >     --- You received this message because you are
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

-- 

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to