We look forward to the review then :wink: (Umm, and don't mention that I'm not quite done yet here).
Printable View
We look forward to the review then :wink: (Umm, and don't mention that I'm not quite done yet here).
I just got this at the library yesterday. Can't wait to start it. :D
Thanks for all the info Beekeeper.
You're most welcome, Mishell. :D
Hmmm hmmmm... Beekeeper, after reading your super professional review, I'm afraid I won't meet the "standards".
But I will do my best...
There is a state of mind involving Alpha state of the brain & a certain physical action that places the mind into a 'learning' state - the reaction almost bypasses the conscious all together to allow 'programming' to occur.Quote:
Originally Posted by CFTraveler
Like the frequencies mentioned, one has to wonder just why the human mind would have developed such a trait or ability. There would appear to be no evolutionary reason or imperative for it to develop.
What I like about Graham Hancock is his depth. Just when you think you've got his message on a subject & are wondering why there is still so much book left, he brings in something that alters the whole perspective of his subject.
I was in that state of mind about the hallucinogen history, the consciousness issue, the commonality of the various myths & experiences in altered states when suddenly we're looking at philological tests being applied to junk DNA.
Now THAT is a fascinating dataset. DNA has long been a puzzle, one that creationists didn't seem to really make use of (maybe it was too scientific for them to get how unlikely it was?) but to have the non-coding sections responding to language tests is a bit mind-blowing.
That was my absolute favourite bit, Jman.Quote:
...but to have the non-coding sections responding to language tests is a bit mind-blowing.
It's an interesting point. (interesting being as much an understatement as it's nice to have air :lol:)
DNA is a puzzle because of how it works - most people think it's the brains of a cell but it's really just a factory that responds to instructions. While it might be theoretically feasible for the bases to form & to then produce proteins, nobody seems to have found the mechanism that makes it all happen - any attempt to track down the physical causes leads down a regression path.
There's also been the puzzle of all the extra bases in virtually every genome - nature uses evolution to meet outside environmental imperatives, but it is about as parsimonious as a banker finding out he's loaning his own money - to have all that extra genome is against the rules for evolution.
(note: I am not trying to start an evolution/creation debate here - evolution has nothing to do with initial creation - that's a furphy thrown up by those who don't understand how things work - evolution doesn't exist until there is a goal seeking mechanism to employ it ie. Life; Creation is about where the Life came from)
Having the so-called 'junk' bases follow the rules of language opens the field way wider than just the development of DNA - not only is there an apparent need for a creative moment, that creation has to be from a high order of development.
I haven't gotten very far into the part about the genome-language yet but there is one immediate problem I see; this couldn't have been a one-off implant of the genome into Earth's ecosystem. The original life on Earth was very simple & had distinctly limited genomes - for the end product of all this to have a much larger genome that still obeys the rules of structured language either the entire development has to be planned ahead in minute detail or else there has to have been ongoing development work done as evolution worked its way up the ladder of complexity.
I think the first is unlikely - being able to predict & control the development of such a complex system from a single point of origin is a MUCH higher level of complexity than the initial development of DNA itself - monitoring progress with on-going modification & additions would be a far simpler task.
Just my thoughts so far...
Begging the question how exactly that would be done.Quote:
...monitoring progress with on-going modification & additions would be a far simpler task.
Yes... interesting proposition isn't it? Just how would one go about monitoring & modifying such a system?
For some time there has been a theory, with some evidence, of 'punctuated equilibrium'
From Principia CyberneticaQuote:
The "punctuated equilibrium" theory of Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould was proposed as a criticism of the traditional Darwinian theory of evolution. Eldredge and Gould observed that evolution tends to happen in fits and starts, sometimes moving very fast, sometimes moving very slowly or not at all. On the other hand, typical variations tend to be small. Therefore, Darwin saw evolution as a slow, continuous process, without sudden jumps. However, if you study the fossils of organisms found in subsequent geological layers, you will see long intervals in which nothing changed ("equilibrium"), "punctuated" by short, revolutionary transitions, in which species became extinct and replaced by wholly new forms. Instead of a slow, continous progression, the evolution of life on Earth seems more like the life of a soldier: long periods of boredom interrupted by rare moments of terror.
Now 'what if...?'
Given a sentient with the ability to create DNA in all its fantastic complexity, one would think they'd have a mechanism for making unobtrusive ongoing changes, & we could easily have the evidence of their machinations in the sudden changes to things - a new DNA complex causing sudden leaps in the life forms extant at the time.
Maybe we finally know the purpose of the 'greys' with their weird experiments on abductees?