Thursday, March 5, 2015

Dig | Symbols | The Ark of the Covenant | Armageddon

Science is at War with Itself Regarding DNA

John Rinn in his lab at Harvard.
Photo: Jamie Campbell for The New York Times

The New York Times

Scientists are divided regarding junk DNA and wars are being waged at the frontiers of biology.

At Harvard’s Department of Stem Cell and Regenerative Biology, John Rinn is overseeing more than a dozen research projects looking for pieces of noncoding DNA that might once have been classified as junk but actually are essential for life. Rinn studies RNA, but not the RNA that our cells use as a template for making proteins. Scientists have long known that the human genome contains some genes for other types of RNA: strands of bases that carry out other jobs in the cell, like helping to weld together the building blocks of proteins. In the early 2000s, Rinn and other scientists discovered that human cells were reading thousands of segments of their DNA, not just the coding parts, and producing RNA molecules in the process. They wondered whether these RNA molecules could be serving some vital function.

In January, Francis Collins, the director of the National Institutes of Health, made a comment that revealed just how far the consensus has moved. At a health care conference in San Francisco, an audience member asked him about junk DNA. “We don’t use that term anymore,” Collins replied. “It was pretty much a case of hubris to imagine that we could dispense with any part of the genome — as if we knew enough to say it wasn’t functional.” Most of the DNA that scientists once thought was just taking up space in the genome, Collins said, “turns out to be doing stuff.”

For T. Ryan Gregory of the University of Guelph in Ontario and a group of like-minded biologists, this idea is not just preposterous but also perilous, something that could yield bad science. The turn against the notion of junk DNA, they argue, is based on overinterpretations of wispy evidence and a willful ignorance of years of solid research on the genome. They’ve challenged their opponents face to face at scientific meetings. They’ve written detailed critiques in biology journals. They’ve commented on social media. When the N.I.H.’s official Twitter account relayed Collins’s claim about not using the term “junk DNA” anymore, Michael Eisen, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, tweeted back with a profanity. Continue reading at The New York Times

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

Bob Dobbs & Derrick de Kerckhove Discuss the Schools of Media Ecology

Derrick de Kerckhove


Literary/Aesthetic Cliché-Probes in the American Classroom-Without-Walls by Bob Dobbs

Marshall McLuhan Audios from Bob Dobbs’ Library

Marshall McLuhan & John Culkin at Fordham, 1967


Young Men’s Hebrew Association, New York City, May 7, 1966

Tony Schwartz Media Lab, 1966-7

Fordham University, 28 June 1966

Museum of Modern Art NYC, 27 June 1966

With Wilfred Watson at Tony Schwartz’s Studio, June 1968

Part 1
Part 2
Tony Schwartz’s Studio, Summer 1968

Tony Schwartz’s Studio, July 1968

Fordham University, 13 November 1967

6 November 1967

Excerpts 1966-68

With Harley Parker and Tony Schwartz, Summer 1968

Fordham University, 18 September 1967

Fordham University, 26 February 1968

Fordham University, March 1968

The Child of the Future

August, 1968

With Harley Parker Discussing Through the Vanishing Point, 4 March 1968

Phone Conversations with Tony Schwartz, January 1968

With Barbara Walters, 29 June 1966

Culture is Our Business, May 1968

Fordham University, 29 April 1968

Fordham University, 20 September 1967

Picnic in Space, 1968

Gutenberg to Batman, 28 April 1966

With Eric McLuhan, Finnegans Wake, 3 August 1969

With Tom Brokaw and Edwin Newmann after the Carter-Ford Debate, 24 September 1976 new

Part 1
Part 2
With Ralph Baldwin & Tony Schwartz, 1966

With John Caulkin & Tony Schwartz, July 1968 new

Part 1
Part 2 new
Phone calls with Tony Schwartz, 1977

Miscellaneous talks new

Thursday, February 19, 2015

Revelation Chapters 1-3 | Exegesis by iON

Transcription by Ronin

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

“The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God” (you, human creators) “gave unto him” (Jesus Christ) “to show unto his servants” (servants would be the one that’s gonna read the story to figure it all out) “things which must shortly come to pass” (future); “and he sent and signified it” (it meaning this story, this work, this essence of God) “by his” (God) “angel” (Gabriel) “unto his servant John.”

John is the one who was running from the Carpathian rule or the Capernia rule when he got into the Grecian Isles, Patmos, which is where this was written.

The angels are bringing to John of Patmos (the Revelator) the gospel story that God (you) gave unto him (Jesus Christ).

“he” is not capitalized because it hasn’t been developed yet that the ‘he’ is God, which is you, humans.

2 who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

That reference comes from

Corinthians 1:6 even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you

John 1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

These references are for what’s supposedly already written because it’s what is to come. The whole thing is about what things which shall be hereafter. It even gives that reference.

So it sets it up. John, the Revelator, lays it out this way—that things which shall be because they already are.

The Lotus Flower, Ring Three & Gram Positive Bacteria

Takashi Murakami


14 February 2015