> > On Jul 21, 9:56 pm, chazwin <chazwy...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > Here's one for Ian. He is curious about Pat's ideas on the "purpose"
> > > and intentions of RNA.
> > > During a conversation about teleology, I was insisting that the
> > > universe is basically devoid of purpose, whilst Pat was pointing out
> > > his theory that everything is connected by a vast Quantum god, and
> > > affects the world with a string theory model, in which He is
> > > demonstrated to be Omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent. It seems
> > > that RNA is the main areas in intervention.

> > > Some quotes to give you the fell of the discussion:

> > > >For all we know, RNA could be using their hosts for experimenting.
> > > > Whilst it may sound silly, we know that, at the root level, it's RNA
> > > >that's calling the shots.
> > > > LOL!!  RNA rules.  And you're living proof.  I couldn't care less
> > > > what you think, Chaz.  RNA runs our machinery.

> > > I excused myself from the discussion, thinking it to whacky, and
> > > wanting to avoid the inevitable insults that were queueing up in my
> > > language processor.

> >      Rather, to give you one side of it.  Later, of course, Chaz comes
> > out with this one:

> > "The raison d'etre of the gene is to make an organism that survives."

> >      If he wants to have his cake and eat it too, that's fine by me.

> Human language is geared towards teleology . That is why there is a
> confusion between reason and purpose and between purpose and ends.
> There are subtle nuances in context that can make those, that think
> the whole of existence is teleological, misinterpret another (either
> intentionally or unintentionally).
> So I hope I never say what I don't mean - though I might.
> Now the same question back to you.
> Did you mean that "RNA is calling the shots", or "RNA might be
> experimenting on us". Or did you mean to say something else?

> Although I have already explained EXACTLY what I meant by raison
> d'etre of genes. I will repeat that the "reason" genes survive is due
> to the survival of the organisms they represent, and vice versa by the
> way. This "reason" is the reason I, and evolutionary science have
> noticed. It is not the "reason" or purpose of genes in themselves.

> So now, in the interests of balance: let us know what you mean by:

> >For all we know, RNA could be using their hosts for experimenting.
> > Whilst it may sound silly, we know that, at the root level, it's RNA that's calling the shots.
> > LOL!!  RNA rules.  And you're living proof.  I couldn't care less
> > what you think, Chaz.  RNA runs our machinery.

> Please try to do it in your own words Without resorting to 5 pages of
> irrelevant copy&paste.

> - Show quoted text -