This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Maybe if your are really inerested in death and immortality you should look at Williams, G.C. (1957) Pleiotropy, natural selection and the evolution of scenscense. JSTOR, Evolution 11 vol. 4.
Its a good place to start plus it shows the necessity for proper cited and peer reviewed material in science debates, not pish you pick up from random sites written by junkies. Peace you shit heads
Alright, why don't you look up Engines of Creation by Eric Drexler, one of the long standing authorities on nanotechnology? All we are saying is that engineering our genome empirically is more desirable than random results via meiosis and chance mutation. You talk as if evolution is perfect and we shouldn't alter it's process in homo sapiens in any way. Bullshit, if a patient carries Huntington's Disease, and we can disable it before it starts to kill said patient, we disable it!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I never said that, ofcourse the optimum outcome of genetic investigation is to stop debilitating diseases. If anyone actually looks closely all i have said is that most of the info on this page is not peer-reviewed and likely not reliable, and that immortality will not be posssible. I never said evolution was perfect but it isnt supposed to be thats how it works chance and time!! and so far its worked out alright with the exception of most of you lot hahahaha
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
can i just say i am baffled by the lack of rea intellect shown here. it amazes me that people are so ready to comment on things they have no idea about, things mentioned in passing, things that are irrelevant. I am shocked by the lack of knowledge of true science and its permenant experimental dependence. Everything here is speculation and secondary information try finding something written by people who know, the people in white coats that evaluate via experiments
You speak of real intellect, yet you can't even form proper grammer. These "people in white coats" are not perfect nor never will be, and science is not the ultimate path of mankind. You're like a guy who sees a mountain and thinks it only has 1 side to it and forget it has 360 degrees.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You are special!! You can not form grammar, it is a set of rules that you use to form correct sentences; making you an researched fool. Also it is spelt GAMMAR not GAMMER if you are going to pick up on little details be consistent. Further, nor never will be is some of the worst formulation to a sentence ever. Dickhead!!!
I think you are the speacil one here only out to start arguements or otherwise have everyone here dislike you, and dickhead isn't a sentence you still didn't address anything I said .
Immortailty will never be possible as long as living organisms require metabolism to sustain themselves. Death was created to allow more efficient passing on of our genes via reproduction.
Your first sentence is acceptable as an opinion. Your secend sentence speaks in form of an exclusive reason. And it seems that opposing reasons can be plausable as "efficient passing on of our genes". Perhaps you can clarify.
I am saying that somatic tissue has evolved in order to allow germline tissue to be passed on ina more effect way, perhaps the comparison of mice and e.coli helps when we consider this: the mouse dispite all of its somatic tissue is able to carry and spread its seed (germline) the e.coli is not so adept spreading only when fortunate to encounter another. Recombination is essential for survival and adaption, somatic tissue aids this process!
Which isa nice deduction made purely on the basis of my previous statement. tell me if we can not damage ourselves, will we also not be able to be dammaged by the environment? this one may regard a s being fundementally flawed as we all know for evolution to occur we must be affected by our environment. are you suggesting we are instead of adapting we constantly fix? seems like bullshit
What do you mean with environmental damage? We have to repair things like protein cross-links, nDNA mutations, mtDNA mutations, lysosomal junk, extracellular junk, dead resistant cells and cell los/atrophy. In order to have evolution you need to have mutations and this (SENS) repair strategy does not prevent nDNA mutations. So, evolution will still be possible.
That's all well and good but will civilization hang on long enough to support the science needed to pull it off? Kinda sad if we all snuff it a decade or two before we discover immortality.
Over Iceland. The methusaleh gene carries the resveratrol found in muscadine grapes that restricts calories. It's SIRT1 & PGC-1a/ NAD+ FOXO3a is the signaling pathway to re-activate a mitochondira's speed; enhancing MnSOD catalysts to reduce the super-oxidation of H202 every time u breathe.
>>>but heads up, SRT 1720 is way ahead, as in red wines with procyanidins/ @ French paradox- if ur into heart disease.
Great video. Thanks to the inspiration offered on other videos, I have become aware of the geometry. It is difficult for me to fathom the exclusion of master architect.
Are you serious about break through DNA research? i dont see this guy with his own lab at berkely univeristy or gettin published in nature, he is a joke!!! jesus everyone who chats on youtube about this shit is an idiot i thought it would be big headed tp point out i am a molecular biologist but now it jus seems relevant to point out how stupid most of these comments are!!!
In the 90's three Nobel prize winners in medicine advanced research that revealed the primary function of DNA lies not in protein synthesis, as widely believed, but in electromagnetic energy reception & transmission. Less than 3% of DNA's function is in protein formulation; more than 93% functions in the realm of Bioelectric signalling.
can you tell me why the sanger institute would invest such a massive amount of money in genetic analysis and why collaborators world wide from highly repected universities like imperial college, rockfella in new york, yale and harvard would bother to research the function of both coding and non-coding dna regions if its main function was not that of protein production and regulation. i enjoy an alternative view but be realistic
It seems you have read this from a spirituality web page, interesting. This information is "according" to Dr. Horowitz a man who claims people keep secrets about the true nature of DNA and who also managed to create a SARS cure which was subsequently bullshit, no suprise and not exactly credible. As the human genome is annotated it is becoming clearer that non-gene regions function in regulatory roles such as micro-RNAs which are emerging as a potential cancer cure and prevention of metastasis.
could you refer me to this reserach because it is proving difficult to track down. if not could you maybe summarise your knowledge of this bioelectric signaling please. thanks
u seem to forget that this site is a a public blog where anyone can freely speak shit, u need to undertsand true science exists in neuron, nature cell and other journals. unless it is here it is isnt worth knowing about. with respect to biological knowledge, obviously there are specific journals for specific subjects. people at harvard researching senescence dont look at a fucking blog for info on where to start they look at previiuos experiemnts and their outsomes i.e. in proper journals
Hey asshole I was just trying to refer some information and if you actually looked, they only use reputable published news articles (Physorg, IEEE) that source only PUBLISHED JOURNALS.
Besides, evolution is highly inefficient. It took 100,000 year spans to develop 1 square inch of brain matter in our hominid ancestors. We will soon manipulate DNA and RNA to engineer our own evolutionary improvements. Are you a religious moralist against manipulating the body at the molecular level?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Mate you are mad. The world wont even derestrict studies on human stem cells, let alone suddenly allow us to create our own mutant human populations be realistic. How many people are going to agree to preimplantation genetic experiments on their cells, and what happens if it goes wrong? Its just not P.C. Your comments are the most ridiculous so far. Also I am a molecular biologist I manipulate cells on a genetic level for a living.
Alright, I am just being the devil's advocate, if you want to hear the entire argument of life extension and dispute it at its source, look up Aubrey de Grey on youtube and elsewhere, this video we're commenting on is a personal work of some youtube account and doesn't offer much besides imagery.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Idiot...baffoon. Preimplantation genetic experiments are suddenly going to be completely acceptable!! Fuck off, I find it hard enough getting grants for stem cell experiments let alone growing a mutant human after manipulating it. My work is in genetic engineering looking at cures for multiple sclerosis but it certainly wont be a mutant human, at least not in the next 60 years.
Listen, It's not "preimplantation", mainstream life extension is against pre-engineering the human genome. Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence is concerned with replacing and repairing cellular material only AFTER the natural cellular damage occurs, but not waiting 40 years to try to patch things up as we are today. Sure it isn't applicable today, but hESC and adult stem cells are just a small part of the gradual shift toward repairing cellular damage sooner rather than later.
Do chromosomes exist in the form of chromatin threads or what? Because in mitosis, (during telophase) if the chromosomes formed uncoil to form chromatin threads, then how can chromosomes be there???
How can it therefore be said that chromosomes, (in prophase) duplicate to form sister chromatids, if only chromatin exists in the first place? Or is it that the chromatin thickens up? Can any one explain?
I respect your work and research. The US has reversed policy to be pro-stem cell research, and things are improving. It's not like life extension is an extreme group that is only attracting public discrimination against science, it has proven to be more of the opposite, attracting more awareness, support, and synergistic research opportunities to fields otherwise cloaked by scientific language and ivory towers. You don't have to agree with their views, but they are funding research too.
You cannot be serious about this. DNA has more functions than only protein syntheses. Only 1% of our DNA codes for proteins the other DNA functions as interons (24%), tandem repeats, miRNA, telomeres, mobile genetic elements (45%),
It's important to mix Good Science animation with God Awful stupid music.
Merlin5by5 7 months ago
Nice video but next time choose more appropriate music..
max3mus 11 months ago
I am very impressed, good work. But you didn't know about the theopolis strand ( kings)
jasonlammons 1 year ago
Interesting video. I liked watching it in a sort of contemplative brainstorming mode. Good choice of musik too.
1096dino 1 year ago
is everything you found on wiki? lol i hope no one has tampered with that information.
rickiex 1 year ago
如果沒有那礙眼的字幕就好了
ringo0918 1 year ago
wicked song
dmix09 2 years ago
...? so? should have used a Mudvayne song instead. From their first album.
ppriess 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I love all the negative ratings : )
philycheesecakes 2 years ago
what did you even say to earn those?
thisguyheisaguy 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Maybe if your are really inerested in death and immortality you should look at Williams, G.C. (1957) Pleiotropy, natural selection and the evolution of scenscense. JSTOR, Evolution 11 vol. 4.
Its a good place to start plus it shows the necessity for proper cited and peer reviewed material in science debates, not pish you pick up from random sites written by junkies. Peace you shit heads
philycheesecake 2 years ago
Alright, why don't you look up Engines of Creation by Eric Drexler, one of the long standing authorities on nanotechnology? All we are saying is that engineering our genome empirically is more desirable than random results via meiosis and chance mutation. You talk as if evolution is perfect and we shouldn't alter it's process in homo sapiens in any way. Bullshit, if a patient carries Huntington's Disease, and we can disable it before it starts to kill said patient, we disable it!
MadPutz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I never said that, ofcourse the optimum outcome of genetic investigation is to stop debilitating diseases. If anyone actually looks closely all i have said is that most of the info on this page is not peer-reviewed and likely not reliable, and that immortality will not be posssible. I never said evolution was perfect but it isnt supposed to be thats how it works chance and time!! and so far its worked out alright with the exception of most of you lot hahahaha
philycheesecake 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
can i just say i am baffled by the lack of rea intellect shown here. it amazes me that people are so ready to comment on things they have no idea about, things mentioned in passing, things that are irrelevant. I am shocked by the lack of knowledge of true science and its permenant experimental dependence. Everything here is speculation and secondary information try finding something written by people who know, the people in white coats that evaluate via experiments
philycheesecake 2 years ago
You speak of real intellect, yet you can't even form proper grammer. These "people in white coats" are not perfect nor never will be, and science is not the ultimate path of mankind. You're like a guy who sees a mountain and thinks it only has 1 side to it and forget it has 360 degrees.
Jahan917 2 years ago
Comment removed
philycheesecake 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You are special!! You can not form grammar, it is a set of rules that you use to form correct sentences; making you an researched fool. Also it is spelt GAMMAR not GAMMER if you are going to pick up on little details be consistent. Further, nor never will be is some of the worst formulation to a sentence ever. Dickhead!!!
philycheesecake 2 years ago
I think you are the speacil one here only out to start arguements or otherwise have everyone here dislike you, and dickhead isn't a sentence you still didn't address anything I said .
Jahan917 2 years ago
Actually, douchebag, it's spelled "grammar."
Metzae 2 years ago
Immortailty will never be possible as long as living organisms require metabolism to sustain themselves. Death was created to allow more efficient passing on of our genes via reproduction.
philycheesecake 3 years ago
Your first sentence is acceptable as an opinion. Your secend sentence speaks in form of an exclusive reason. And it seems that opposing reasons can be plausable as "efficient passing on of our genes". Perhaps you can clarify.
upcycle 3 years ago
I am saying that somatic tissue has evolved in order to allow germline tissue to be passed on ina more effect way, perhaps the comparison of mice and e.coli helps when we consider this: the mouse dispite all of its somatic tissue is able to carry and spread its seed (germline) the e.coli is not so adept spreading only when fortunate to encounter another. Recombination is essential for survival and adaption, somatic tissue aids this process!
philycheesecake 3 years ago
look this up Turritopsis nutricula its the only immortale animal and it is real!!
spartanwarrior217 3 years ago
its all germ line, it has no somatic tissue. if u wan to be a very simple organism then immortality is possible
philycheesecake 3 years ago
Immortality will be possible when we succeed in repairing the damage caused as a side effect of our metabolism.
189643478 3 years ago
Which isa nice deduction made purely on the basis of my previous statement. tell me if we can not damage ourselves, will we also not be able to be dammaged by the environment? this one may regard a s being fundementally flawed as we all know for evolution to occur we must be affected by our environment. are you suggesting we are instead of adapting we constantly fix? seems like bullshit
philycheesecake 3 years ago
What do you mean with environmental damage? We have to repair things like protein cross-links, nDNA mutations, mtDNA mutations, lysosomal junk, extracellular junk, dead resistant cells and cell los/atrophy. In order to have evolution you need to have mutations and this (SENS) repair strategy does not prevent nDNA mutations. So, evolution will still be possible.
189643478 2 years ago
another great post m8 i aint seen this one till now 5*
lksskjhh 3 years ago
That's all well and good but will civilization hang on long enough to support the science needed to pull it off? Kinda sad if we all snuff it a decade or two before we discover immortality.
gandalf2069 3 years ago
Over Iceland. The methusaleh gene carries the resveratrol found in muscadine grapes that restricts calories. It's SIRT1 & PGC-1a/ NAD+ FOXO3a is the signaling pathway to re-activate a mitochondira's speed; enhancing MnSOD catalysts to reduce the super-oxidation of H202 every time u breathe.
>>>but heads up, SRT 1720 is way ahead, as in red wines with procyanidins/ @ French paradox- if ur into heart disease.
orthon360 3 years ago
Great video. Thanks to the inspiration offered on other videos, I have become aware of the geometry. It is difficult for me to fathom the exclusion of master architect.
scurry1965 3 years ago
las razas no existen
ghargan 3 years ago
spectacular vid. Love the running dna code :-)
musicoftheuniverse 3 years ago
Another Stellar Vid my friend
I am going to send you some stuff on Dr. Len Horowitz & his breakthrough DNA research. Or you can just Google it too
Dr. len Horowitz DNA pirates of the Sacred Spiral
AlchemicalAscendancy 3 years ago
Len Horowitz is a wonder. His work on Sacred Healing Codes is awesome too.
musicoftheuniverse 3 years ago
Are you serious about break through DNA research? i dont see this guy with his own lab at berkely univeristy or gettin published in nature, he is a joke!!! jesus everyone who chats on youtube about this shit is an idiot i thought it would be big headed tp point out i am a molecular biologist but now it jus seems relevant to point out how stupid most of these comments are!!!
philycheesecake 3 years ago
In the 90's three Nobel prize winners in medicine advanced research that revealed the primary function of DNA lies not in protein synthesis, as widely believed, but in electromagnetic energy reception & transmission. Less than 3% of DNA's function is in protein formulation; more than 93% functions in the realm of Bioelectric signalling.
AlchemicalAscendancy 2 years ago
this is true.. This is why where so receptive to harmonix.
particleion 2 years ago
Agreed I was intending for cheesecakephil to reply, since he is such a scholar after all.
You & I are always on the same wave particleion.
blessings
AlchemicalAscendancy 2 years ago
can you tell me why the sanger institute would invest such a massive amount of money in genetic analysis and why collaborators world wide from highly repected universities like imperial college, rockfella in new york, yale and harvard would bother to research the function of both coding and non-coding dna regions if its main function was not that of protein production and regulation. i enjoy an alternative view but be realistic
philycheesecake 2 years ago
It seems you have read this from a spirituality web page, interesting. This information is "according" to Dr. Horowitz a man who claims people keep secrets about the true nature of DNA and who also managed to create a SARS cure which was subsequently bullshit, no suprise and not exactly credible. As the human genome is annotated it is becoming clearer that non-gene regions function in regulatory roles such as micro-RNAs which are emerging as a potential cancer cure and prevention of metastasis.
philycheesecake 2 years ago
could you refer me to this reserach because it is proving difficult to track down. if not could you maybe summarise your knowledge of this bioelectric signaling please. thanks
philycheesecake 2 years ago
look up immortality institute on google
MadPutz 2 years ago
u seem to forget that this site is a a public blog where anyone can freely speak shit, u need to undertsand true science exists in neuron, nature cell and other journals. unless it is here it is isnt worth knowing about. with respect to biological knowledge, obviously there are specific journals for specific subjects. people at harvard researching senescence dont look at a fucking blog for info on where to start they look at previiuos experiemnts and their outsomes i.e. in proper journals
philycheesecake 2 years ago
Hey asshole I was just trying to refer some information and if you actually looked, they only use reputable published news articles (Physorg, IEEE) that source only PUBLISHED JOURNALS.
Besides, evolution is highly inefficient. It took 100,000 year spans to develop 1 square inch of brain matter in our hominid ancestors. We will soon manipulate DNA and RNA to engineer our own evolutionary improvements. Are you a religious moralist against manipulating the body at the molecular level?
MadPutz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Mate you are mad. The world wont even derestrict studies on human stem cells, let alone suddenly allow us to create our own mutant human populations be realistic. How many people are going to agree to preimplantation genetic experiments on their cells, and what happens if it goes wrong? Its just not P.C. Your comments are the most ridiculous so far. Also I am a molecular biologist I manipulate cells on a genetic level for a living.
philycheesecake 2 years ago
Alright, I am just being the devil's advocate, if you want to hear the entire argument of life extension and dispute it at its source, look up Aubrey de Grey on youtube and elsewhere, this video we're commenting on is a personal work of some youtube account and doesn't offer much besides imagery.
MadPutz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Idiot...baffoon. Preimplantation genetic experiments are suddenly going to be completely acceptable!! Fuck off, I find it hard enough getting grants for stem cell experiments let alone growing a mutant human after manipulating it. My work is in genetic engineering looking at cures for multiple sclerosis but it certainly wont be a mutant human, at least not in the next 60 years.
philycheesecake 2 years ago
Listen, It's not "preimplantation", mainstream life extension is against pre-engineering the human genome. Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence is concerned with replacing and repairing cellular material only AFTER the natural cellular damage occurs, but not waiting 40 years to try to patch things up as we are today. Sure it isn't applicable today, but hESC and adult stem cells are just a small part of the gradual shift toward repairing cellular damage sooner rather than later.
MadPutz 2 years ago
Do chromosomes exist in the form of chromatin threads or what? Because in mitosis, (during telophase) if the chromosomes formed uncoil to form chromatin threads, then how can chromosomes be there???
How can it therefore be said that chromosomes, (in prophase) duplicate to form sister chromatids, if only chromatin exists in the first place? Or is it that the chromatin thickens up? Can any one explain?
1091Floyd21 2 years ago
I respect your work and research. The US has reversed policy to be pro-stem cell research, and things are improving. It's not like life extension is an extreme group that is only attracting public discrimination against science, it has proven to be more of the opposite, attracting more awareness, support, and synergistic research opportunities to fields otherwise cloaked by scientific language and ivory towers. You don't have to agree with their views, but they are funding research too.
MadPutz 2 years ago
You cannot be serious about this. DNA has more functions than only protein syntheses. Only 1% of our DNA codes for proteins the other DNA functions as interons (24%), tandem repeats, miRNA, telomeres, mobile genetic elements (45%),
189643478 2 years ago
I think your a joke. learn how to communicate. a dog knows how to speak better than people that use words.
78.100111 GF.1000111 ٌ.101111
YourPartofEVIL 2 years ago
Ah yes, buzz me some more chromozomes please.
K3n3sis 3 years ago
WooOOOoosssshhhhh :) *gulp*
VoDitas 3 years ago