DNA is often described as the ‘Blueprint of Life’. It is said to control the overall shape of our body (hox genes) and to contain sufficient information to produce specialised proteins for each and every cell of our bodies.
It is said to be responsible for acquired characteristics and small, random mutations are claimed to be fundamental to the evolution of the human species.
Professor Denis Noble of Oxford University begs to differ and tries to put DNA back into its proper place in this very readable paper https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/physiol.00017.2018
- The ‘Central Dogma of Biology’ that information can only pass from nucleic acid to protein and not from protein to acid – is incorrect.
- Genome wide association studies are, with a few exceptions, largely meaningless.
- When a cell reproduces there are not just a few mutations but actually millions, and these are largely corrected by the cell proteins themselves.
- There is more information in the cell than can possibly be stored in the DNA
- Random mutations are not only the source of genetic variation. Causation operates from the cellular and higher levels.
- DNA is probably not the origin of life
- It is always wrong to say “This is the gene for that”
- Acquired characteristics can in fact be inherited
- Since genes are ‘expressed’ differently according to context, one valid interpretation of this is that the DNA code of a gene is just “nonsense (just a sequence of CGAT bases) until it is interpreted functionally”
- It can happen that an important gene is completely knocked out and the organism still manages to get by; the cell is still able to form proteins which function in place of those the non-functioning gene was originally used for.
And in this paper https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3262309/
- Similarly, a difference in DNA sequence may have a wide variety of possible phenotypic effects, including no effect at all, until the boundary conditions are set, including the actions of many other genes, the metabolic and other states of the cell or, organism and the environment in which the organism exists.
- The induction mechanisms emerge as the embryo interacts with its environment. Morphogenesis is not entirely hard-wired into the genome.
- First, “are organisms encoded as molecular descriptions in their genes?” “No.”
Dr Stefan Lanka also has plenty to say on the subject:
“In the year 2000, however, the entire genetic theory was refuted as well, after the contradictory data of the so-called human genome project was published together with the embarrassing claim that the entire human genome had been mapped, even though more than half of it was completely invented.”
“In each nucleus the composition of the nucleic acids is constantly changing and for about 90% of our proteins no ‘genetic templates’ can be found which could be called genes.”
“In view of these results, no scientist today is able to formulate a tenable definition of a gene that has not been disproved long ago. “
“However, when the wife of the later Nobel prize winner Crick drew a double helix and this drawing was published in the famous scientific magazine Nature as an alleged scientifically developed model of the supposed DNA, a new and very successful hype began, the so-called molecular genetics”
http://wissenschafftplus.de/uploads/article/wissenschafftplus-the-virus-misconception-part-1.pdf
http://wissenschafftplus.de/uploads/article/wissenschafftplus-the-virus-misconception-part-3.pdf
Classical theory holds that Ribosomes are responsible for assembling long and complex molecules from shorter chunks using the information stored in DNA.
At the time of writing, this page of Tom Cowan‘s website contains the following statement:
” I have discovered that the electron microscope images of ribosomes are actually gas bubbles, stained with dye, from dead or dying tissue”.
https://drtomcowan.com/pages/the-new-biology
Yet Wikipedia actually has drawings of a ribosome and an animation of how it actually works!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Translation_(biology)#/media/File:Protein_translation.gif
DNA is a helical piezoelectric semi-conductor.
It will act as an antenna to convert electromagnetic radiation to an electric current and it will produce an electric current when compressed.
It’s conductivity will vary with temperature.
DNA Electronics
The authors of this paper are so impressed they try to use it in an electric circuit
https://www.embopress.org/doi/full/10.1038/sj.embor.embor834
“DNA has been shown to act as an insulator, a semiconductor, a conductor or a proximity‐induced superconductor depending on its sequence, length and orientation”.
“This discovery has made it an interesting candidate for other roles that nature did not intend for this molecule”
“The beauty of DNA electronics lies in the fact that it uses the techniques of genetic engineering that nature has perfected over billions of years”
DNA is a fractal antenna in electromagnetic fields
“The wide frequency range of interaction with EMF is the functional characteristic of a fractal antenna, and DNA appears to possess the two structural characteristics of fractal antennas, electronic conduction and self symmetry. These properties contribute to greater reactivity of DNA with EMF in the environment, and the DNA damage could account for increases in cancer epidemiology, as well as variations in the rate of chemical evolution in early geologic history.”
DNA as a power source
Fritz Popp claims that DNA is a sort of power generator and reaction regulator for the cell.
Experiments have revealed that DNA is a generator of photons (visible light) and that these photons are used to regulate chemical reactions within the cell.
Max Rempel describes his hypothesis that DNA is instrumental in the creation of a morphogenetic field that controls the shape of our bodies.
The field is created by a circuitry of proton ‘wires’ maintained by the DNA to create a resonant cymatic chamber of electric field vibration.
Related pages:
