Posted on 08/17/2002 6:06:34 PM PDT by forsnax5
Very funny! Seems to me that some one who feels constrained by civilized rules of conduct is not a very good person, don't ya think?
Who knows? Until we decipher everything in the genetic code, which will probably be never, we will not be able to be certain about it.
Transposons however are apparently quite undeterministic. For example some will insert themselves in specific places and later delete itself and leave things as they were - but not all the time!
I can think of a notable exception, although you're right about the regular crowd.
In contrast to your own style of rude, arrogant, cruel, disdainful, nasty, and informationless posting, perhaps?
The problem is, there really is no such thing as a backward gene. It is a phrase used by the university PR department that wrote the article to illustrate or explain something.
Here are the keys -- 1) trancription is driven by promoter elements.
2) The DNA's orientation within the context of the chromosome can change. That doesn't mean it is "backwards". Orientation is what is meant, not backwards. Turn your car around and go the other way and you are not driving backwards.
The "backwards" gene and protein you guys are talking about is present in either orientation, before or after a retrotransposition that changes the DNA orientation in the chromosome. All six reading frames are present no matter what the orientation.
No. I am acting in that manner purposely.
Notice, though, when vaderetro actually dropped his defensive shield and spoke like a human being, I answered him with no insult at all?
Notice also how no one has answered any of my questions?
It is because they don't know. What do you think about a group of people who base their identity and philosophy of life on a subject they know nothing about and don't understand?
Yet, they demean and insult anyone who does not share their quasi-religious views?
It's just weird. Their behavior is very cult-like.
Actually, I said "weakly non-deterministic." :)
I was thinking that since these "Jumping Gene" events don't seem to go very far, that the "Turing" logic hit a stop rather quickly -- a point where a condition arises that has no "next instruction" to execute.
Perhaps viewing this process as a Turing machine is a weak metaphor.
There may be no particular mechanism behind it at all. Any sequence of events that has a beginning state and an expected ending state has a possibility of failure. In meiosis, the failure rate is quite small, but not zero.
Now, I'm certain that geneticists have recognized before now that meiosis doesn't always complete "correctly," but perhaps the view has been that it was all or nothing; success or catastrophe. Now they're seeing an intermidate position that's more subtle than they'd thought possible.
What is it?
Obviously there is a mechanism for the transposition. But that's not the it you are talking about.
Also, what is the more subtle meiotic intermediate you are talking about?
No, he means in contrast to the endlessly polite and reasoned postings by medved and Gore3000. After all, all the rude behavior and personal attacks are coming from the E side of the table, obviously.
I think it defeats your purpose and unnecessarily antagonizes everyone.
Notice, though, when vaderetro actually dropped his defensive shield and spoke like a human being, I answered him with no insult at all?
I noticed. The reason behind it was less apparent.
Notice also how no one has answered any of my questions?
Neither have you.
It is because they don't know.
Probably so. I certainly don't. Why not explain it then?
What do you think about a group of people who base their identity and philosophy of life on a subject they know nothing about and don't understand?
Complete nonsequitur. And complete nonsense in my opinion. People don't base their "identity" on the latest scientific research or on the arcane and theoretical details of any particular scientific field. And most don't even think about the question of their identity at all.
Ask people what their philosophy of life is and 98% will have never seriously thought about it in their entire lives and the rest have no answer that will satisfy everyone.
Yet, they demean and insult anyone who does not share their quasi-religious views?
Or they respond in kind as I did.
It's just weird. Their behavior is very cult-like.
It's human nature which you seem to make little allowance for.
Exactly.
Look at this thread. I read it not because anything having to do with the silly e vs c circus.
It's interesting work and also fun to talk about the way the work is publicized.
Yet what happens. The cultist come in and out of the blue start screaming about creationists or whatever.
Not only are they close minded rude petty vindictive and ignorant, they are disruptors.
Nothing can come before their obsessions.
Exactly.
Well, thanks for sharing, anyway...
I like to give people time to respond. And, I also like to know if they actually care. If they actually do have any interest in biology. Usually the case is no, which is very strange given their dogmatic beliefs.
Anyhow, the first is Barbara McClintock.
As you say, but what have you done to correct this? Nothing. You've contributed only your bile.
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.