Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation
From: bv_schornak (nowhere_at_schornak.de)
Date: 09/19/04
- Next message: Henri Wilson: "Re: OK, I'm Ready For the Patronizing Insults From the Resident Gurus!"
- Previous message: Lars Tr?ger: "Re: Russia gets it. Democrats don't."
- In reply to: Timberwoof: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Next in thread: Timberwoof: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Reply: Timberwoof: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Reply: George Hammond: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 22:21:35 +0000 (UTC)
Timberwoof wrote:
>bv_schornak wrote:
>
>>Timberwoof wrote:
>>
>>>bv_schornak wrote:
>>>
>>>>George Hammond wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>stew dean wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>The point is the brain is a 3-axis mirror symmetirc construct
>>>>>>>which begins at the 8 cell stage in embryology (1st 3 cleavages).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Let's review that again - the brain is roughly symmetrical along one
>>>>>>axis, as is the rest of the body. You have DNA to thank for this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>[Hammond]
>>>>>Really? I'm ponly claiming the Left-right symmetry of the
>>>>>body comes from the first cleavage of the Egg (a fact proved
>>>>>by Roux, Conklin and others). You just stated that it comes
>>>>>
>>>>> from DNA.... what makes you think that?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>You've already forgotten that we get two complete (but half
>>>>sized) organisms, if we separate both cells after the first
>>>>cleavage? And four quarter sized organisms after the second
>>>>cleavage? George, George...
>>>>
>>>>Where else than in the DNA should the information about the
>>>>final organism sit?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Mitochondrial DNA, chemical environment during gestation, and the whole
>>>environment as the being grows up.
>>>
>>>
>>Isn't the Mitrochondrial DNA just a "copy" of the original
>>double helix?
>>
>>
>
>Nope. It is DNA that is separate from the nuclear DNA. It is believe that these
>two sources of DNA stem from two separate lines of single-celled species which
>merged to form a new type of life. The same thing is believed to hae happened in
>plants: chloroplasts are analogous to mitochondria.
>
I see. Obvious, the "egg" and "sperm", merging together...
You know much more in this field than I do!
>>Dunno, but I think it is valid for the cells
>>after the 1st cleavage. [Hammond] claims that the symmetry
>>of the organism is determined by those two cells, which is
>>not true - <http://www.devbio.com/article.php?ch=3&id=15>.
>>The article says that until the _third_ cleavage the cells
>>are able to grow to a fully developed organism with 1/2 or
>>1/4 of the normal size, if we separate the cells from each
>>other.
>>
>>
>
>Hmmm. Identical twins form this way. But I do not think they are born
>half-szied.
>
Right in both cases (my sisters are monozygotic twins).
Having a look at this site
<http://tidepool.st.usm.edu/crswr/cleavage.html>,
[Hammond]'s theory is stabbed one more time. The deter-
minate cleavage type (bottom line) does not look really
symmetric in the horizontal plane...
Greetings from Augsburg
Bernhard Schornak
- Next message: Henri Wilson: "Re: OK, I'm Ready For the Patronizing Insults From the Resident Gurus!"
- Previous message: Lars Tr?ger: "Re: Russia gets it. Democrats don't."
- In reply to: Timberwoof: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Next in thread: Timberwoof: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Reply: Timberwoof: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Reply: George Hammond: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
