You are in error my friend, is condescending and rude. There is no need to speak that way.
On the contrary, there are most certainly codings within cells that kill cells that change badly, be it from damage during mitosis or bad transcription of dna. When these processes fail, we get cancer. In addition isn't ALL natural selection an issue of the cellular or dna level? The changes that express themselves are caused at the cellular or dna level. For example, there is a major difference between the hemoglobin of humans and other species that has a MASSIVE influence on efficiency. Its an about 25 percent difference in efficiency. Caused by 3, count them THREE different amino acids in one protein. On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Jojo Jaro <jth...@hotmail.com> wrote: > You are in error my friend. You come to this conclusion only because you > make the first erroneous assumption that there is "natural selection" > occuring. Nothing can me more unsupported than this speculation. > > As I've mentioned, Natural Selection does not occur at the cellular or DNA > level. There is no arbiter within the cell that tells which changes are to > be retained and which are to be discarded. > > > > Jojo > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" < > a...@lomaxdesign.com> > To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>; <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 10:17 AM > > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA > > > At 08:26 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: >> >>> Well, Jed's story says that we can "store" exabytes of data. >>> >> >> Yes, but only if we don't mind that it's exabytes of copies of about 1.5 >> gigabytes of data. >> >> >>> Nowadays, we only use the "coding" part of DNA to figure out the amount >>> of "information". Scientists erroneously assume the non-coding parts are >>> "junk DNA" that have no information. That is not true. The non-coding >>> parts are not Junk. Newer research are indicating that all of our DNA have >>> functions we still do not know or understand. If they have function, they >>> contain information we don't know about yet. >>> >> >> That's an exaggeration of "new research." Some functions are being found >> for some "noncoding" DNA. I've understood "noncoding DNA" to refer to >> sequences that are not used to create proteins. There can be a few other >> functions, for example, telomeres are noncoding, but serve to protect >> chromosomes from copying errors at the ends. >> >> There is an interesting piece of evidence. Noncoding DNA much more >> rapidly mutates because of lack of selection pressure. Noncoding DNA gives >> a measure of time since organisms diverged. If this DNA were serving a >> critical biological function, it would be under selection pressure. >> >> (Most mutations of critical genes kill the cell or the organism, babies >> spontaneously abort, etc.) >> >> >> >
