Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Conceptualizing cancer cells as ancient 'toolkit'
Arizona State University ^ | February 7, 2011 | Unknown

Posted on 02/08/2011 5:47:18 AM PST by decimon

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last

1 posted on 02/08/2011 5:47:20 AM PST by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem; DvdMom; grey_whiskers; Ladysmith; Roos_Girl; Silentgypsy; conservative cat; SunkenCiv

Ping


2 posted on 02/08/2011 5:47:59 AM PST by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: decimon
In his novel "Candide", Voltaire made fun of early modern philosophy, by creating the philosopher Pangloss who believed that we live in "the best possible world" and that everything that happens is "for the best".

I see similarity in the modern approach to evolution. Everything that has happened over the course of billions of years is because of evolution. It is the magic explanation for everything. And it's all good. Cancer? That's evolution! And it's a toolkit! We're lucky to have it! Really!

Pollyanna science -- they've hitched their wagon to evolution and now must constantly invent evidence that it is real and good.

3 posted on 02/08/2011 5:59:03 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (BO + MB = BOMB -- The One will make sure they get one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: decimon

Interesting, but I don’t follow the part where he says cancer is a “preprogrammed response to stress”. Does that mean that those of us who don’t stress don’t get cancer? Everything I’ve read previously suggest that cancer occurs due to genetic mistakes in the reproduction of cells, leading to cancer cells that reproduce out of control. Kind of like what might happen if you make a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy..... If the copy process is sloppy, eventually you may end up with a copy that is a transmogrification of the original.


4 posted on 02/08/2011 6:01:17 AM PST by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rbg81

Stress is a generic term in biology.

Stress can be heat, cold, mutagens, redox, too little nutrient, too much nutrient, too little oxygen or too much, high or low osmolality, etc.

They aren’t referring to the emotion elicited by an Obama speech.


5 posted on 02/08/2011 6:06:57 AM PST by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: decimon

The “coming era of personalized medicine” and obamacare are diametrically opposed.


6 posted on 02/08/2011 6:10:09 AM PST by printhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

I personally believe that Genesis is true but I also believe in an old Earth. I know it’s complicated but it makes sense to me.

As far as using the theories of evolution for the study of biology, well, it is a successful approach in general. When God created man and every other creature, he used the same tool box.


7 posted on 02/08/2011 6:11:05 AM PST by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Let me put it in non-evolutionary terms ~ GOD created cancer. Now live with it!


8 posted on 02/08/2011 6:13:30 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rbg81
The guy is simply saying that model is wrong ~ that the genes or DNA stretches within genes that served to proliferate slime milds are still there waiting for a signal ~ and when that happens, Katy bar the door!

See, a real "Creationist" point of view in that ~ you don't need MUTATIONS ~ it was there all along!

9 posted on 02/08/2011 6:16:07 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc
I personally believe that Genesis is true but I also believe in an old Earth. I know it’s complicated but it makes sense to me.

Me too. All you have to know is that God's days are probably VERY long.

10 posted on 02/08/2011 6:17:22 AM PST by Lazamataz (If Illegal Aliens are Undocumented Workers, then Thieves are Undocumented Shoppers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

“osmolality”

I’d add that to my working vocabulary but I’d never be sure when it should be ‘osmolality’ and when it should be ‘osmolarity.’


11 posted on 02/08/2011 6:17:47 AM PST by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
All you have to know is that God's days are probably VERY long.

It's those meetings.

12 posted on 02/08/2011 6:20:24 AM PST by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: decimon

Sorry, osmolality is the term used when measuring osmolarity in body fluids such as blood.

I can’t keep them straight either, I had to do a quick google search to see which was which.


13 posted on 02/08/2011 6:27:48 AM PST by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
I see similarity in the modern approach to evolution. Everything that has happened over the course of billions of years is because of evolution. It is the magic explanation for everything. And it's all good. Cancer? That's evolution! And it's a toolkit! We're lucky to have it! Really!

First creationists say evolution has no place in modern science, predicts nothing, helps nothing. Then when evolution is used to try to cure disease you say it's suddenly a magic explanation for everything. News flash, evolution is widely used in science. Most successful theories are.

14 posted on 02/08/2011 6:30:38 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
First creationists say evolution has no place in modern science, predicts nothing, helps nothing.

I think you would be hard-pressed to find a Creationist who believed that. I do not believe in evolution -- but I recognize that it is the dominant paradigm in biology today. I don't want to force it out of the classroom. I don't want to force it out of the textbooks.

All I want is for discussions of science to include additional discussion from those of us who feel that evolution is a flawed theory.

It is the evolutionist who feel that counter-arguments have "no place in modern science". What you are engaged in, would be considered "projection" by a psychologist.

15 posted on 02/08/2011 6:38:56 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (BO + MB = BOMB -- The One will make sure they get one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

I was expecting an discernible relation to osmosis. Didn’t see that in the definition.


16 posted on 02/08/2011 6:42:59 AM PST by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: decimon

Osmolarity is the measure of solute concentration, defined as the number of osmoles (Osm) of solute per liter (L) of solution (osmol/L or Osm/L).

Osmolality is a measure of the osmoles of solute per kilogram of solvent (osmol/kg or Osm/kg).


17 posted on 02/08/2011 6:53:39 AM PST by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
...evolution is a flawed theory.

I see evolution as a theory that has served us well but that will in time be superceded. Charles Darwin will be wrong in the sense that Isaac Newton was wrong.

18 posted on 02/08/2011 6:54:02 AM PST by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc
Osmolarity is the measure of solute concentration, defined as the number of osmoles (Osm) of solute per liter (L) of solution (osmol/L or Osm/L).

Osmolality is a measure of the osmoles of solute per kilogram of solvent (osmol/kg or Osm/kg).

This is all part of the conspiracy to make me feel stupid. ;-)

19 posted on 02/08/2011 6:57:20 AM PST by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
All I want is for discussions of science to include additional discussion from those of us who feel that evolution is a flawed theory.

All scientific theories are flawed or limited in some way.

It is the evolutionist who feel that counter-arguments have "no place in modern science".

Counter-arguments are fine, they've been going on for over 150 years, and evolution still stands as the dominant scientific theory.

20 posted on 02/08/2011 6:59:51 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson