> > On Jul 22, 12:20 am, Pat <PatrickDHarring...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > 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.

>      OK, but I will link in a few pages.

>    In this one, a scientist mentions intelligent RNA in reference to
> viruses.  It begs the question 'why would it be different in more
> complex creatures?'

> http://www.nserc.gc.ca/news/2005/p050329-5bio.htm

> Here's one that talks about how bacteria have demonstrated RNA binding
> and regulating how other RNA splice.

> http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v447/n7143/abs/nature05769.html

> And, if pictures help:  (note the title: RNA in control)

> http://noncoding.blogspot.com/2007/05/molecular-biology-rna-in-contro...

>    So, perhaps what we humans are is viral RNA in control of
> mitochondrial/bacterial machinery using DNA as a storage device at the
> cellular level.  And these little modified viral and bacterial bits
> don't NEED to have consciousness, per se, because they're clever
> enough to build us.

> - Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -