Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

? I though(t) you were a Libra.

I am a Libra, but not a Bull. I am a Ox though, according to the Chinese.

http://youtu.be/KLRhhheOdGY



This is a long one below; I haven't listened to it all yet:

Dr. Goswami, I think I met him long ago.

http://youtu.be/Ycn-I1-aDwo

So far we certainly think alike in a lot of ways.

http://www.amitgoswami.org/

http://www.amitgoswami.org/quantum-a...-civilization/

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

http://youtu.be/KLRhhheOdGY



This is a long one below; I haven't listened to it all yet:

Dr. Goswami, I think I met him long ago.

http://youtu.be/Ycn-I1-aDwo

So far we certainly think alike in a lot of ways.

http://www.amitgoswami.org/

http://www.amitgoswami.org/quantum-a...-civilization/

:45 What was the point of the Rutherford reference? Why did the reference cut off the actual scientific explanation? Was it simply to imply (lie of omission) that there was a mystery where one does not actually exist?

1:04 Says science can not "explain" telepathy, clairvoyance, etc. Simply assumes there is something that needs explaining. There isn't.

1:25 An idea that explains "literally everything" in fact explains nothing. It's a standard creationist tactic.
Scientist, "Why are there no mammal fossils in Cambrian rocks?" Creationist, "God did it." Scientist, "Why are there mammal fossils in Eocene rocks?" Creationist, "God did it."

1:49 Pop pseudo-psychology of "left brain" vs. "right brain". Utter hogwash.

2:28 Hyper simplistic description of education in the US based on how post-modernists think education works rather than any knowledge of how education is actually practiced in the US.

3:06 More ridiculous pseudo-psychology of left/right with a further addition of the misconception of feminine/masculine piled on top.

3:26 Stupid historical nonsense implying that ancient societies were more "balanced" because Egypt recognized matrilineal descent. Many, many ancient societies were just as patrilineal and patriarchal as modern societies.

3:38 Earthly, cosmic and personal energy? What units are those energies measured in? If you can't measure them, then how do you know that people are sensing them "less" today?

3:50 Appeal for recognition as a martyr? Shamans, seers, magicians and others were not outlawed, they were abandoned. They are ridiculed today because they continue to pretend to work when it is blatantly obvious to most that they don't.

4:00 Blatantly inaccurate description claiming that "every religion" says essentially the same thing.

4:16 Flat out falsehood about "scientifically proven that all species are evolving into more complex beings". Not true. Not true. Not true. One word . . . tapeworms.

4:26 Tries to claim that genetically determined instincts are "racial memories". Nonsense.

4:40 Hundredth monkey effect. Pure myth.

5:07 Everything has a natural vibration? What is the frequency of Barack Obama? how do you measure that?

5:23 Chakras. Pseudo-science at its pinnacle.

5:34 Each continent has a chakra point and the chakra points are equadistant from one another? Someone has never looked at a globe!

6:12 What the hell is a molten crystal? Does this moron not know the difference between a fluid and a solid?

6:19 He claims that there are locations on Earth where electro-magnetic energy is emanating. That would mean that photons are being emitted. Funny that no one noticed the Earth glowing in those spots.

6:38 Bermuda Triangle nonsense. Ships and planes are periodically lost for many reasons. Statistically speaking, those losses will occur more often in locations where there is more ship and plane traffic. No mystery.

6:58 Oh goodie. New age mangling of the already discounted ideas of Freud.

7:12 Strained analogy between physiology of emotions and radio broadcasts.

7:22 Emotions have a "vibratory frequency"? What units are they measured in? What tools are used to make those measurements.

7:39 The frequency of fear is "long and slow"? Does this clown even know what frequency actually is? What the hell is a "long" frequency?

7:43 We are supposed to be amazed that waves in one medium (air) can induce the formation of waves in other media? And those waves can display constructive and destructive interference patterns? Whoa!

This is what happens when an ignoramus is confronted with simple science. They interpret it to mean something deep and important. Ignorance kills.

8:10 There are not 64 "codes" in DNA. The triplet system produces 64 codons. Three of them do not code for any amino acid and many of the others are redundant. Additionally, there are some organisms that use a slightly different system compared to the typical one.

8:13 DNA is not made out of carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and nitrogen. Only someone who pretends to know anything would forget phosphorous or fail to mention all of the sulfur in the proteins that make up the histones and other support proteins in the chromatin.

8:23 Holy crap! He's making the 64 codon mistake even worse! We already use all 64 codons all the time! Two triplets coding for the same amino acid does not mean a code is unused!

8:48 Emotion is the switch to "turn on" those unused codons? Seriously, what the hell is this guy babbling about? This is biological gibberish!

9:14 Drawing a wave pattern on top of a diagram of the basic double helix of DNA is just plain stupid. DNA does not actually exist in cells in that simplistic arrangement. He is completely ignoring the tertiary structure (large amounts of coiling around histones) as well as ignoring the fact that DNA exists in a semi-dissolved state within the cytoplasm of the nucleus.

10:14 The Phantom DNA Effect is complete garbage. The results were not actually published in a scholarly journal. The methods section is incredibly vague and full of simple mistakes and includes other psuedo-scientific nonsense. Most importantly, the effect has never been independently verified and since the descriptions are vague the results can't be verified.

10:24 Can't even spell phantom correctly.

10:30 DNA doesn't "directly shape the physical world" around us.

11:00 December 21, 2012 was a transition from one form of energy to the next! Does anyone else remember shifting from gravitational potential energy into mass? I'll have to check but I don't recall such an event occurring.

11:12 The weakening of the Earth's magnetic field is not because it's rotational period is increasing! Pure nonsense.

11:34 Cardiac cells do not pulse in response to "pulses" from the Earth. Cardiac pacemaker

11:55 How exactly have "scientists" been measuring the Earth's pulse? What tool do they use to do that?

12:43 If all of these other groups are saying similar nonsense to my nonsense it must there for not be nonsense? Nope.

13:57 Eastern mysticism flavored rambling. Nothing to back it up beyond his say so? No thanks, I've heard enough to know that this guy is a clueless moron.

14:22 The marriage of science and spirituality? Is that like Mormon baptism of the dead? One side says "I do" while the other party is not even in the same state?

15:10 New Age, feel-good gobbledygook.

15:28 Conspiracy theory about the elite leaders for the last few thousand years? I hope the reptilian overlords make a cameo!

16:18 Bait and switch about DNA. A chemist uses an analogy of DNA as an antenna in up regulation of expression (bait) becomes discussion of photon and phoneme absorption(switch). Those are two different topics.

16:49 Just because we can use the same units to measure two things (hertz) does not mean they are "fundamentally linked". I can measure my height and the depth of the ocean in meters. That doesn't mean that the ocean can become me by draining to a depth that is the same as mine. Sound waves generated by a musical instrument are not fundamentally linked to water molecules just because you can measure them both in hertz.

17:06 The stones of the pyramids were levitated into place!

18:35 The candle in the dark metaphor would have Carl Sagan rolling in his grave! Only a moron would think that this video is filled with light to hold back the darkness of ignorance.

19:39 It just wouldn't be New Age nonsense without some worshipping of fractals!

Summary: Seriously Eric. If this is the sort of thing you seek out to help you understand how things work then it is no wonder that you are incapable holding any sort of constructive discussion. You will literally be incapable of telling wishes apart from reality.

Originally Posted by Vandal-72

Summary: Seriously Eric. If this is the sort of thing you seek out to help you understand how things work then it is no wonder that you are incapable holding any sort of constructive discussion. You will literally be incapable of telling wishes apart from reality.

Simply making it available; people can do with it whatever they want, as you did.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Simply making it available; people can do with it whatever they want, as you did.

I posted a snipped article I presented to Dr. The Rani Since you're special Eric, I'll post the entire article to "make it available" to you. You're special.
I'll do up some additional commentary wrt stuff I know. The text color will be blue.

Originally Posted by PLOS ONE

Genes Involved in Vasoconstriction and Vasodilation System Affect Salt-Sensitive Hypertension (Title of Article Here)

• Lorena Citterio mail,
• Marco Simonini,
• Laura Zagato,
• Erika Salvi,
• Simona Delli Carpini,
• Chiara Lanzani,
• Elisabetta Messaggio,
• Nunzia Casamassima,
• Francesca Frau,
• Francesca D'Avila,
• Daniele Cusi,
• Cristina Barlassina,
• Paolo Manunta

Above are a list of folks involved in the study.



Above are visual aids for the study. (deletia because Vbullentin is not happy) Specifically, error message =
"The text that you have entered is too long (82056 characters). Please shorten it to 25000 characters long."
Abstract

The importance of excess salt intake in the pathogenesis of hypertension is widely recognized. Blood pressure is controlled primarily by salt and water balance because of the infinite gain property of the kidney to rapidly eliminate excess fluid and salt. Up to fifty percent of patients with essential hypertension are salt-sensitive, as manifested by a rise in blood pressure with salt loading. We conducted a two-stage genetic analysis in hypertensive patients very accurately phenotyped for their salt-sensitivity. All newly discovered never treated before, essential hypertensives underwent an acute salt load to monitor the simultaneous changes in blood pressure and renal sodium excretion. The first stage consisted in an association analysis of genotyping data derived from genome-wide array on 329 subjects. Principal Component Analysis demonstrated that this population was homogenous. Among the strongest results, we detected a cluster of SNPs located in the first introns of PRKG1 gene (rs7897633, p = 2.34E-05) associated with variation in diastolic blood pressure after acute salt load. We further focused on two genetic loci, SLC24A3 and SLC8A1 (plasma membrane sodium/calcium exchange proteins, NCKX3 and NCX1, respectively) with a functional relationship with the previous gene and associated to variations in systolic blood pressure (the imputed rs3790261, p = 4.55E-06; and rs434082, p = 4.7E-03). In stage 2, we characterized 159 more patients for the SNPs in PRKG1, SLC24A3 and SLC8A1. Combined analysis showed an epistatic interaction of SNPs in SLC24A3 and SLC8A1 on the pressure-natriuresis (p interaction = 1.55E-04, p model = 3.35E-05), supporting their pathophysiological link in cellular calcium homeostasis. In conclusions, these findings point to a clear association between body sodium-blood pressure relations and molecules modulating the contractile state of vascular cells through an increase in cytoplasmic calcium concentration.
Citation: Citterio L, Simonini M, Zagato L, Salvi E, Delli Carpini S, et al. (2011) Genes Involved in Vasoconstriction and Vasodilation System Affect Salt-Sensitive Hypertension. PLoS ONE 6(5): e19620. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0019620
Editor: Toomas Kivisild, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
Received: December 20, 2010; Accepted: April 12, 2011; Published: May 9, 2011
Copyright: © 2011 Citterio et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: This study was supported in part by European Union grant LSMH-CT-2006-037093 InGenious HyperCare (www.hypercare.eu), HEALTH-F4-2007-201550 HYPERGENES (www.hypergenes.eu), Italian Ministry of Health RF-FSR-2008-1141719 (www.salute.gov.it) (PM), and Italian Ministry of University and Scientific Research 2008W5AZEC_001 (www.miur.it) (PM). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Self explanatory. Abstract. Of note, "Creative Commons" license means I can lawfully present it to you here.

Move to post 2 here.

Make Vbullentin happy!

Originally Posted by PLOS

Supporting Information

Figure S1.
Multidimensional scaling plot of stage 1 cohort (blue circles), Utah residents with Northern and Western European ancestry population from the CEPH collection (green circles) and Tuscans (red circles) of HapMap data Release 27. The two principal components are plotted on the axis.
(PDF)
Figure S2.
Regional plot of the PRKG1 and flanking region (chromosome 10 q11.23). The P values [−log(P)] of all genotyped SNPs annotated with the gene structure are indicated. The best top SNP for ΔDBP120 is marked with purple diamond and the rs code is also reported. The graph was drawn with LocusZoom software.
(PDF)
Figure S3.
Map of the initial part of PRKG1 gene. The three independent SNPs are in the red box. The LD value (r2) between a specific pair of SNPs is shown within a corresponding “square”. The graph was drawn with Haploview software (http://www.broad.mit.edu/mpg/haploview).
(PDF)
Figure S4.
Multiple sequence alignment of rs7897633 region in intron 2 of PRKG1. The highlighted area indicates SNP position. M means A/C transversion. Sequence alignment is provided by the UCSC Genome Browser (http://genome.ucsc.edu).
(PDF)
Figure S5.
Regional plot of the SLC24A3 and flanking region (chromosome 20 p11.23). The P values [−log(P)] of all genotyped SNPs annotated with the gene structure are indicated. The best top SNP for ΔSBP120 is marked in purple and the rs code is also reported.
(PDF)
Figure S6.
Graphic representation of SF2/ASF, SC35, SRp40 and SRp55 consensus motifs with respect to rs3790261 A/G polymorphism. Coloured bars represent high-score motifs of various binding factors. The height of each bar indicates the score value, the position along the x axis indicates its location along the sequence (SLC24A3 intron3/exon4) and the width of the bar represents the length of the motif. The rs3790261 A/G at position +20 in exon 4 of SLC24A3 and the relative SRp40 legend are boxed.
(PDF)
Figure S7.
Regional plot of the SLC8A1 and flanking region (chromosome 2 p22.1). The P values [−log(P)] of all genotyped SNPs annotated with the gene structure are indicated. The top ranking SNP for ΔSBP120 is marked in purple and the rs code is also reported.
(PDF)
Table S1.
Genotype quality control data for Illumina 318K data.
(XLS)
Table S2.
Association of SNPs in PRKG1, SLC24A3 and SLC8A1 with DDBP120, DSBP120 in stage 2 (n = 159).
(XLS)


Body of article. Assorted squares and such are a Vbulletin issue .
Actual article sans Vbullentin issues here: http://www.plosone.org/article/info:...l.pone.0019620


Author Contributions

Originally Posted by PLOS continued

Conceived and designed the experiments: LC DC PM. Performed the experiments: CL EM NC FF FD. Analyzed the data: LC MS ES CL. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: LZ SDC MS. Wrote the paper: LC CB PM. Acquisition of the phenotype data: MS CL PM.
References

1. Abegunde DO, Mathers CD, Adam T, Ortegon M, Strong K (2007) The burden and costs of chronic diseases in low-income and middle-income countries. Lancet 370: 1929–1938. Find this article online
2. Meneton P, Jeunemaitre X, de Wardener HE, MacGregor GA (2005) Links between dietary salt intake, renal salt handling, blood pressure, and cardiovascular diseases. Physiol Rev 85: 679–715. Find this article online
3. Haddy FJ (2006) Role of dietary salt in hypertension. Life Sci 79: 1585–1592. Find this article online
4. Campese VM (1994) Salt sensitivity in hypertension. Renal and cardiovascular implications. Hypertension 23: 531–550. Find this article online
5. Sanders PW (2009) Dietary salt intake, salt sensitivity, and cardiovascular health. Hypertension 53: 442–445. Find this article online
6. Hill MA, Meininger GA, Davis MJ, Laher I (2009) Therapeutic potential of pharmacologically targeting arteriolar myogenic tone. Trends Pharmacol Sci 30: 363–374. Find this article online
7. Guyton AC, Langston JB, Navar G (1964) Theory for Renal Autoregulation by Feedback at the Juxtaglomerular Apparatus. Circ Res 15SUPPL): 187–197. Find this article online
8. Cowley AW Jr (1997) Genetic and nongenetic determinants of salt sensitivity and blood pressure. Am J Clin Nutr 65: 587S–593S. Find this article online
9. Cusi D, Barlassina C, Azzani T, Casari G, Citterio L, et al. (1997) Polymorphisms of alpha-adducin and salt sensitivity in patients with essential hypertension. Lancet 349: 1353–1357. Find this article online
10. Manunta P, Lavery G, Lanzani C, Braund PS, Simonini M, et al. (2008) Physiological interaction between alpha-adducin and WNK1-NEDD4L pathways on sodium-related blood pressure regulation. Hypertension 52: 366–372. Find this article online
11. Barlassina C, Schork NJ, Manunta P, Citterio L, Sciarrone M, et al. (2000) Synergistic effect of alpha-adducin and ACE genes causes blood pressure changes with body sodium and volume expansion. Kidney Int 57: 1083–1090. Find this article online
12. Manunta P, Messaggio E, Ballabeni C, Sciarrone MT, Lanzani C, et al. (2001) Plasma ouabain-like factor during acute and chronic changes in sodium balance in essential hypertension. Hypertension 38: 198–203. Find this article online
13. Sober S, Org E, Kepp K, Juhanson P, Eyheramendy S, et al. (2009) Targeting 160 candidate genes for blood pressure regulation with a genome-wide genotyping array. PLoS One 4: e6034. Find this article online
14. Hirschhorn JN, Daly MJ (2005) Genome-wide association studies for common diseases and complex traits. Nat Rev Genet 6: 95–108. Find this article online
15. Hindorff LA, Sethupathy P, Junkins HA, Ramos EM, Mehta JP, et al. (2009) Potential etiologic and functional implications of genome-wide association loci for human diseases and traits. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106: 9362–9367. Find this article online
16. WTCCC (2007) Genome-wide association study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3,000 shared controls. Nature 447: 661–678. Find this article online
17. Org E, Eyheramendy S, Juhanson P, Gieger C, Lichtner P, et al. (2009) Genome-wide scan identifies CDH13 as a novel susceptibility locus contributing to blood pressure determination in two European populations. Hum Mol Genet 18: 2288–2296. Find this article online
18. Wang Y, O'Connell JR, McArdle PF, Wade JB, Dorff SE, et al. (2009) From the Cover: Whole-genome association study identifies STK39 as a hypertension susceptibility gene. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106: 226–231. Find this article online
19. Newton-Cheh C, Johnson T, Gateva V, Tobin MD, Bochud M, et al. (2009) Genome-wide association study identifies eight loci associated with blood pressure. Nat Genet. Find this article online
20. Levy D, Ehret GB, Rice K, Verwoert GC, Launer LJ, et al. (2009) Genome-wide association study of blood pressure and hypertension. Nat Genet. Find this article online
21. Price AL, Patterson NJ, Plenge RM, Weinblatt ME, Shadick NA, et al. (2006) Principal components analysis corrects for stratification in genome-wide association studies. Nat Genet 38: 904–909. Find this article online
22. Yu K, Wang Z, Li Q, Wacholder S, Hunter DJ, et al. (2008) Population substructure and control selection in genome-wide association studies. PLoS One 3: e2551. Find this article online
23. Pahl R, Schafer H (2010) PERMORY: an LD-exploiting permutation test algorithm for powerful genome-wide association testing. Bioinformatics 26: 2093–2100. Find this article online
24. Weber S, Bernhard D, Lukowski R, Weinmeister P, Worner R, et al. (2007) Rescue of cGMP kinase I knockout mice by smooth muscle specific expression of either isozyme. Circ Res 101: 1096–1103. Find this article online
25. Feil R, Gappa N, Rutz M, Schlossmann J, Rose CR, et al. (2002) Functional reconstitution of vascular smooth muscle cells with cGMP-dependent protein kinase I isoforms. Circ Res 90: 1080–1086. Find this article online
26. Lytton J (2007) Na+/Ca2+ exchangers: three mammalian gene families control Ca2+ transport. Biochem J 406: 365–382. Find this article online
27. Blaustein MP, Zhang J, Chen L, Song H, Raina H, et al. (2009) The pump, the exchanger, and endogenous ouabain: signaling mechanisms that link salt retention to hypertension. Hypertension 53: 291–298. Find this article online
28. Dong H, Jiang Y, Triggle CR, Li X, Lytton J (2006) Novel role for K+-dependent Na+/Ca2+ exchangers in regulation of cytoplasmic free Ca2+ and contractility in arterial smooth muscle. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 291: H1226–1235. Find this article online
29. de la Sierra A, Giner V, Bragulat E, Coca A (2002) Lack of correlation between two methods for the assessment of salt sensitivity in essential hypertension. J Hum Hypertens 16: 255–260. Find this article online
30. Blaustein MP, Lederer WJ (1999) Sodium/calcium exchange: its physiological implications. Physiol Rev 79: 763–854. Find this article online
31. Karaki H, Ozaki H, Hori M, Mitsui-Saito M, Amano K, et al. (1997) Calcium movements, distribution, and functions in smooth muscle. Pharmacol Rev 49: 157–230. Find this article online
32. Di Rienzo A, Hudson RR (2005) An evolutionary framework for common diseases: the ancestral-susceptibility model. Trends Genet 21: 596–601. Find this article online
33. Tamura N, Itoh H, Ogawa Y, Nakagawa O, Harada M, et al. (1996) cDNA cloning and gene expression of human type Ialpha cGMP-dependent protein kinase. Hypertension 27: 552–557. Find this article online
34. Michael SK, Surks HK, Wang Y, Zhu Y, Blanton R, et al. (2008) High blood pressure arising from a defect in vascular function. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105: 6702–6707. Find this article online
35. Feil R, Holter SM, Weindl K, Wurst W, Langmesser S, et al. (2009) cGMP-dependent protein kinase I, the circadian clock, sleep and learning. Commun Integr Biol 2: 298–301. Find this article online
36. Zhao Q, Wang L, Yang W, Chen S, Huang J, et al. (2008) Interactions among genetic variants from contractile pathway of vascular smooth muscle cell in essential hypertension susceptibility of Chinese Han population. Pharmacogenet Genomics 18: 459–466. Find this article online
37. Pfeifer A, Klatt P, Massberg S, Ny L, Sausbier M, et al. (1998) Defective smooth muscle regulation in cGMP kinase I-deficient mice. Embo J 17: 3045–3051. Find this article online
38. Black DL (2003) Mechanisms of alternative pre-messenger RNA splicing. Annu Rev Biochem 72: 291–336. Find this article online
39. Bourgeois CF, Lejeune F, Stevenin J (2004) Broad specificity of SR (serine/arginine) proteins in the regulation of alternative splicing of pre-messenger RNA. Prog Nucleic Acid Res Mol Biol 78: 37–88. Find this article online
40. Lee GS, Choi KC, Jeung EB (2009) K+-dependent Na+/Ca2+ exchanger 3 is involved in renal active calcium transport and is differentially expressed in the mouse kidney. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 297: F371–379. Find this article online
41. Visser F, Valsecchi V, Annunziato L, Lytton J (2007) Exchangers NCKX2, NCKX3, and NCKX4: identification of Thr-551 as a key residue in defining the apparent K(+) affinity of NCKX2. J Biol Chem 282: 4453–4462. Find this article online
42. Iwamoto T, Kita S, Zhang J, Blaustein MP, Arai Y, et al. (2004) Salt-sensitive hypertension is triggered by Ca2+ entry via Na+/Ca2+ exchanger type-1 in vascular smooth muscle. Nat Med 10: 1193–1199. Find this article online
43. Navis G, Bakker SJ, van der Harst P (2010) Dissecting the genetics of complex traits: lessons from hypertension. Nephrol Dial Transplant 25: 1382–1385. Find this article online
44. Citterio L, Lanzani C, Manunta P, Bianchi G (2010) Genetics of primary hypertension: The clinical impact of adducin polymorphisms. Biochim Biophys Acta. Find this article online
45. McCarthy MI, Hirschhorn JN (2008) Genome-wide association studies: potential next steps on a genetic journey. Hum Mol Genet 17: R156–165. Find this article online
46. Wang WY, Barratt BJ, Clayton DG, Todd JA (2005) Genome-wide association studies: theoretical and practical concerns. Nat Rev Genet 6: 109–118. Find this article online
47. Bianchi G (2005) Genetic variations of tubular sodium reabsorption leading to “primary” hypertension: from gene polymorphism to clinical symptoms. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 289: R1536–1549. Find this article online
48. Manunta P, Cusi D, Barlassina C, Righetti M, Lanzani C, et al. (1998) Alpha-adducin polymorphisms and renal sodium handling in essential hypertensive patients. Kidney Int 53: 1471–1478. Find this article online
49. Li Y, Abecasis G (2006) Mach 1.0: Rapid Haplotype Reconstruction and Missing Genotype Inference. Am J Hum Genet S79: 2290. Find this article online
50. Purcell S, Neale B, Todd-Brown K, Thomas L, Ferreira MA, et al. (2007) PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses. Am J Hum Genet 81: 559–575. Find this article online
51. Cartegni L, Wang J, Zhu Z, Zhang MQ, Krainer AR (2003) ESEfinder: A web resource to identify exonic splicing enhancers. Nucleic Acids Res 31: 3568–3571. Find this article online




Citations of referenced materials. Basically "endnotes". Endnotes are of course learned in Jr. High reports. Plagarism is bad.

1. Note those acronyms like PRKG1. That is a gene tag. These are used so other scientists and other folks of interest can perform assorted searches and get results that are consistant.
2. SNP = single nucleotide polymorphism.
3. Na+ = sodium ion, valance state +1
4. Ca+2 = calcium ion, valence state +2
5. rs<insert number here> SNP number , revelvent information here.

Originally Posted by Vandal-72

8:13 DNA is not made out of carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and nitrogen. Only someone who pretends to know anything would forget phosphorous or fail to mention all of the sulfur in the proteins that make up the histones and other support proteins in the chromatin.

Eh. May as well add Zn for all of those zinc finger proteins as well. Just saying. You may also want to provide information to Eric wrt hydrogen bonding in DNA.

Remember, you should do this because you'd be 'Simply making it available; people can do with it whatever they want, as you did. "

This is weird also:

Originally Posted by Vandal-72

1:25 An idea that explains "literally everything" in fact explains nothing. It's a standard creationist tactic.
Scientist, "Why are there no mammal fossils in Cambrian rocks?" Creationist, "God did it." Scientist, "Why are there mammal fossils in Eocene rocks?" Creationist, "God did it."

I'll admit I'm lazy and didn't look at Eric's links. Is "1.25" part of your numbering scheme or one chosen by one or more of Eric's URL's. Is there some significance to using something besides whole numbers?

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

This is weird also:


I'll admit I'm lazy and didn't look at Eric's links. Is "1.25" part of your numbering scheme or one chosen by one or more of Eric's URL's. Is there some significance to using something besides whole numbers?

1:25 is the time in the video where the idea is discussed/distorted. One minute, twenty-five seconds into the video, the narrator claims that New Age belief explains "literally everything", his words.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Simply making it available; people can do with it whatever they want, as you did.

Of all the things the Internet holds, you chose to make this available. Why this particular video? Can you honestly answer this question?

Originally Posted by Vandal-72

1:25 is the time in the video where the idea is discussed/distorted. One minute, twenty-five seconds into the video, the narrator claims that New Age belief explains "literally everything", his words.

OK. Thanks. That gives me a reference in time I can use to check out the "Bermuda Triangle". I don't think ships/planes whatever "just disappear" from UFO abductions/whatever. I think a more plausible answer would be something like what happens off the coast of S. Africa, bad weather.

For Eric.
Your genotype at rs7897633 is AA on the + strand.
View this SNP at:
23andme.com
SNPedia.com
dbSNP
Google Scholar







Brought to you by SNPTIPS Firefox addon. Isn't this cool or what? I can hover my mouse over a rs# and it will tell me what I have.

8:10 There are not 64 "codes" in DNA. The triplet system produces 64 codons. Three of them do not code for any amino acid and many of the others are redundant. Additionally, there are some organisms that use a slightly different system compared to the typical one.

8:13 DNA is not made out of carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and nitrogen. Only someone who pretends to know anything would forget phosphorous or fail to mention all of the sulfur in the proteins that make up the histones and other support proteins in the chromatin.

8:23 Holy crap! He's making the 64 codon mistake even worse! We already use all 64 codons all the time! Two triplets coding for the same amino acid does not mean a code is unused!

Uh yeah. This came pretty soon after the Bermuda Triangle time checkpoint. I agree that this part of the presentation is very messed up.
a. 3 base pairs = 1 codon.
b. There is such a thing as a "stop codon". This does not code for an amino acid. Example here: rs1815739 mutation

Info wrt Rags:
Your genotype at rs1815739 is CC on the + strand.
View this SNP at:
23andme.com
SNPedia.com
dbSNP
Google Scholar





c. Promoter regions also don't code for amino acids. Here's an example. Use favorite search engine for TNF-308A.

OK Rags, I'll bite. You and vandal delete everything you posted after the video, and I'll delete the video.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

OK Rags, I'll bite. You and vandal delete everything you posted after the video, and I'll delete the video.

No! That would be like depriving a rotting carcass to a flock of vultures. I dunno about Vandal, but I rather enjoy pecking that thing.

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

No! That would be like depriving a rotting carcass to a flock of vultures. I dunno about Vandal, but I rather enjoy pecking that thing.

It's proof positive that anything Eric posts is most likely coming from a realm of wishes and fantasy. Why would I be in favor of hiding the truth?

Originally Posted by Vandal-72

It's proof positive that anything Eric posts is most likely coming from a realm of wishes and fantasy. Why would I be in favor of hiding the truth?

Well's there's that and it appears you spent a lot of time and effort putting in time checkpoints and gawd knows I spent a lot of time and effort getting that PLOS ONE article to play nice with Vbullentin.

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

Well's there's that and it appears you spent a lot of time and effort putting in time checkpoints and gawd knows I spent a lot of time and effort getting that PLOS ONE article to play nice with Vbullentin.

You sure have added a lot of garbage to a good thread. Not appreciated, and not interested in playing with it.

Wishes and fantasy. Hmmmm, can I wish vandal to go away??

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

You sure have added a lot of garbage to a good thread. Not appreciated, and not interested in playing with it.

:: Bows ::

Thread =
Thread: Philosophy, religion, science and turnings

Well, gosh, I tried to put that PLOS ONE article in on post, but Vbullentin said NO!

Said article is a legitimate scientific journal article. Wrt verbosity, post #3 was mostly end notes. A "proper" research document must have end notes which document pertinent supporting material to said document. The stuff I added was just more research material on my part which was germane to the article at hand. That means that anyone on the MB who is into genomics can refer to the article I posted and refer to the end notes for further information. Likewise, the material I added via SNPTIPS also documents a SNP from my personal set of SNPS and provides supporting documentation of the SNP in question.

So:
1. The posts in question are "garbage" wrt Eric. Basically, I'm perfectly fine with your interpretation of the material so presented. It may be garbage because of the abundance of "jargon".
2. Now, if I choose to add my own material to the article, I must likewise present supporting documentation as well. Scientific articles demand that I do so in order to fulfill basic protocols.
3. Now to get to the simple idea of the article. It is basically research on a set of genetic variants which cause excess table salt intake (junk foodies) to give one hypertension (high blood pressure). This is cutting edge stuff, Eric. I know from the article at hand that I should toss laden junk foodies in the trash because I have a set of genetic variants that do indeed cause excess table salt to give me high blood pressure.
4. The conclusion: If Rags adjusts his diet to cut the salt intake, then Rags won't have to mess with high blood pressure medication.

Wishes and fantasy. Hmmmm, can I wish vandal to go away??

If wishes were fishes, we'd all be casting nets.

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

:: Bows ::

Thread =
Thread: Philosophy, religion, science and turnings

Well, gosh, I tried to put that PLOS ONE article in on post, but Vbullentin said NO!

Said article is a legitimate scientific journal article. Wrt verbosity, post #3 was mostly end notes. A "proper" research document must have end notes which document pertinent supporting material to said document. The stuff I added was just more research material on my part which was germane to the article at hand. That means that anyone on the MB who is into genomics can refer to the article I posted and refer to the end notes for further information. Likewise, the material I added via SNPTIPS also documents a SNP from my personal set of SNPS and provides supporting documentation of the SNP in question.

So:
1. The posts in question are "garbage" wrt Eric. Basically, I'm perfectly fine with your interpretation of the material so presented. It may be garbage because of the abundance of "jargon".
2. Now, if I choose to add my own material to the article, I must likewise present supporting documentation as well. Scientific articles demand that I do so in order to fulfill basic protocols.
3. Now to get to the simple idea of the article. It is basically research on a set of genetic variants which cause excess table salt intake (junk foodies) to give one hypertension (high blood pressure). This is cutting edge stuff, Eric. I know from the article at hand that I should toss laden junk foodies in the trash because I have a set of genetic variants that do indeed cause excess table salt to give me high blood pressure.
4. The conclusion: If Rags adjusts his diet to cut the salt intake, then Rags won't have to mess with high blood pressure medication.

Excess table salt is not a good idea in any case. I doubt people need all this gobbledegook to understand that. I prefer posts written and explained in English.

As far as "cutting edge," that belongs to the return of consciousness to science; overturning the outdated paradigm that folks like vandal were taught and believe in. "Consciousness is part of reality as we know it," says another scientist working in that field:

http://youtu.be/Phep6qqmtmk

Don't let his name or his accent bother you too much. He won't shoot.

Vandal displayed his flawed logical abilities by claiming that my post of an amateur video, which I made no comment on, "proves" that everything I post is wishes and fantasies. Bless vandal's pointy little head. Some of us are moving toward the new paradigm, and some of us can't go there.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Excess table salt is not a good idea in any case. I doubt people need all this gobbledegook to understand that. I prefer posts written and explained in English.

You claim to understand science all the time. How come you you can't understand something that was clearly written in English this time? Of course, it's obvious that you have only been pretending to understand any of the science you come across.

As far as "cutting edge," that belongs to the return of consciousness to science; overturning the outdated paradigm that folks like vandal were taught and believe in.

Meaningless New Age babble.

"Consciousness is part of reality as we know it," says another scientist working in that field:

http://youtu.be/Phep6qqmtmk

Don't let his name or his accent bother you too much. He won't shoot.

The very first thing this guy says is a blatant lie! Washington DC is nowhere near opposite to the Philippines. Check for yourself.

Do you even understand how completely idiotic you look when you link these videos implying they have some sort of important ideas that others should be aware of? You are completely pathetic.

Biocentrism is not a truth, it doesn't even rank as a testable hypothesis. It most certainly is not support for your ridiculous woo.

Vandal displayed his flawed logical abilities by claiming that my post of an amateur video, which I made no comment on, "proves" that everything I post is wishes and fantasies. Bless vandal's pointy little head. Some of us are moving toward the new paradigm, and some of us can't go there.

Why did you choose to post that video instead of one of literally millions of other amateur videos on YouTube? Your refusal to answer the question gives you away.

Besides, there was nothing in that video that was any more ridiculous than in the other videos you post and do "comment" on. You aren't fooling anyone. We all know how ignorant and delusional you are.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Excess table salt is not a good idea in any case. I doubt people need all this gobbledegook to understand that. I prefer posts written and explained in English.

Health professionals need exactly this cutting edge information to understand the underlying biochemical mechanisms as to why excess NaCl intake results in hypertension in some folks. At present we have a set of hypertension drugs including, but not limited to diuretics, ACE inhibitors , and beta blockers. . So, what's coming is something Eric may not like, is that once physicians gain knowledge of the genome and assorted variants is they can pick which drug would work best. I mean I already know that I'd prefer (if needed) and ACE inhibitor vs. a beta blocker. Beta blockers interact with the other genome "cluster" I have that revs up my immune system wrt hay fever. Beta blockers would aggravate hay fever.So the game plan would be to chuck salt intake first and if that didn't work , (with the advice of a competent physician ) use what he/she would prescribe. I would of course advise said physician of salt sensitivity and hay fever issues.

As far as "cutting edge^Bingo! ^{<font color="red"><b>Bingo!</b></font>} ," that belongs to the return of consciousness to science; overturning the outdated paradigm that folks like vandal were taught and believe in. "Consciousness is part of reality as we know it," says another scientist working in that field:

Huh? The purpose of science is to understand reality as it is. As far as I know, I can't go and think magic pony thoughts and flip parts of my genome I don't like.

http://youtu.be/Phep6qqmtmk

OMG! This thing's more than an hour long! Perhaps Vandal will do me a favor and do what he did with your other video. Cripes! Somebody please put some checkpoints in this thing so I won't have to spend a whole hour on 1 video.

Don't let his name or his accent bother you too much. He won't shoot.

That's not the problem. The length and the signal to noise ratio of the part I did listen to is the problem.

Vandal displayed his flawed logical abilities by claiming that my post of an amateur video, which I made no comment on, "proves" that everything I post is wishes and fantasies. Bless vandal's pointy little head. Some of us are moving toward the new paradigm, and some of us can't go there.

Wrt Vandal? He seems to be a good note taker. It takes real diligence and (patience I don't possess) to actually listen to long assed videos and check point them.
On your last video he managed to listen to just shy of 20 minutes. Hate to say it, but that's better than I can manage.

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

Huh? The purpose of science is to understand reality as it is. As far as I know, I can't go and think magic pony thoughts and flip parts of my genome I don't like.

But that's where the cutting edge is, along the lines of The Biology of Belief; our magic pony minds will indeed shift our genome. Everything that vandal doesn't like, will be the frontier of science.

As far as genes and medicine, you are correct that this is progress, but it has little to do with this thread, which is how the 4 items in the title are inter-related (I know, I started this thread long ago). Practical science alone is not the subject of this thread.

OMG! This thing's more than an hour long! Perhaps Vandal will do me a favor and do what he did with your other video. Cripes! Somebody please put some checkpoints in this thing so I won't have to spend a whole hour on 1 video.

first 35 minutes only. I guess when my original post didn't get up, I forgot to add that the 2nd time. Not much noise IMO, although Lanza is a bit rambling, and Art Bell was obsessed with a few questions.

Wrt Vandal? He seems to be a good note taker. It takes real diligence and (patience I don't possess) to actually listen to long assed videos and check point them.
On your last video he managed to listen to just shy of 20 minutes. Hate to say it, but that's better than I can manage.

Vandal just posts his prejudices. They are less than worthless. This time I won't click on his stupid comment.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

But that's where the cutting edge is, along the lines of The Biology of Belief; our magic pony minds will indeed shift our genome. Everything that vandal doesn't like, will be the frontier of science.

There is zero evidence indicating that minds can "shift" a genome. Do you even know what a genome is? Can you describe what a genome "shift" would entail?

As far as genes and medicine, you are correct that this is progress, but it has little to do with this thread, which is how the 4 items in the title are inter-related (I know, I started this thread long ago). Practical science alone is not the subject of this thread.

Just because you made the first post does not mean you are the arbiter of what is allowed in the discussion. That isn't how Internet forums work.

first 35 minutes only. I guess when my original post didn't get up, I forgot to add that the 2nd time. Not much noise IMO, although Lanza is a bit rambling, and Art Bell was obsessed with a few questions.

Vandal just posts his prejudices. They are less than worthless. This time I won't click on his stupid comment.

Pointing out mistakes and lies is prejudice? Shows everyone exactly what your thoughts are worth.

My approach to the "double slit experiment" and what it says, is to compare it to the yin/yang dichotomy, which expresses itself in many ways since it is a fundamental principle of the universe. In this case, the principle in inflected this way: the probability waves represent the side of the mind that is indefinite, fluid, unfocused, non-sequential, non-dominant and subconscious; what is referred to as "right-brained" (I know some materialists like vandal dismiss this brain analogy, but it exists as a concept at least, which defines the contrast I am discussing). The collapse of the wave function into an observed "particle" represents the side of the mind that is definite, well-defined, static, focused, sequential, dominant and consciously rational, or what is called "left-brained." I would not define the probability state as unconscious or determined and the observed or actual state as conscious or free. The probability state is, in my estimation, known in our consciousness in a non-dominant way, but not yet defined through procedures of science or reasoning, which is what the observer is doing in the double-slit experiment. But we should be careful not to apply that experiment as the basis for our entire worldview.

The yin yang principle is also reflected in such things as computers (all of which run on the principle of "on or off," programmed as 1s and 0s), male and female sexes, male plugs and female plugs for electric currents and outlets, assertive and passive/receptive actions, proton and electron and magnetic charges, black and white, actual vs. potential, and so on.

The Philosophers Wheel explores this dichotomy as the first of the two basic dichotomies that define our philosophy, and gives more info on what I mean here. The other dichotomy, often confused with it in one way or the other, is the spiritualist vs. materialist axis, which is exemplified by me vs. vandal. These two axes form the basis for the philosophers wheel diagram or symbol in my essay. The spiritualist vs. materialist axis is represented as up and down, and the yin vs. yang axis is represented as left and right. Quantum physics as I see it demonstrates the yin yang polarity in the form of potential/probability vs. actual/defined, while the involvement of the observer brings back consciousness and therefore spiritualism back into physics, from which materialism has excluded it since circa 1700. Spiritualism represents the creative and conscious vs. the objective or mechanically determined or caused, which is viewed as the priority in materialism.

Among our four Jungian functions, sensing and thinking lead us toward materialism and objectivism, while intuiting (archetypal awareness) and feeling (empathy and sensitivity to the subconscious) lead us toward spiritualism and consciousness. Thinking and INtuition are left brained or yang, while Sensing and Feeling are right-brained or yin, in my estimation. Each function occupies a quadrant on the wheel symbol.

Perhaps more knowledge may lead me to change this view of mine.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

But that's where the cutting edge^Bingo! is, along the lines of The Biology of Belief; our magic pony minds will indeed shift our genome. Everything that vandal doesn't like, will be the frontier of science.

Here are the basics of genetic study.

As far as genes and medicine, you are correct that this is progress, but it has little to do with this thread, which is how the 4 items in the title are inter-related (I know, I started this thread long ago). Practical science alone is not the subject of this thread.

1. Yes, I would say that the addition of genomics will prove quite useful. At some point, folks and their doctors won't have to experiment around to find the proper medication for a particular condition. In other cases, some simple lifestyle modification may do the trick as well.2. Purpose of thread: "Culture and values" : Subjective and subject to the POV of whoever decides to post here. "Philosophy,religion,science, and turnings" Open ended in that one can an attitude that secular progress is a penultimate goal to be achieved. I'd say the upcoming 1T is where genomics/"personalized medicine" will go mainstream.3. While you started this thread , you don't own it. See item 2.

first 35 minutes only. I guess when my original post didn't get up, I forgot to add that the 2nd time. Not much noise IMO, although Lanza is a bit rambling, and Art Bell was obsessed with a few questions.

Well, that's a start. First checkpoint is at 35 minutes. I'd interprete that as saying the first 35 minutes are mostly noise, but not much signal.

Vandal just posts his prejudices. They are less than worthless. This time I won't click on his stupid comment.

IOW, am I to assume you'll be using your ignore feature for its intended purpose? . It's been a very long time since I clicked on any of the posts written by the person I have on ignore. That person generates post that I think are cruft and thus take away eyeball room from all of the other posts which don't do that. Then there's Privoxy which I use to augment Vbulletin's lack of the thread ignore function. If Vbullentin doesn't get that reverse ignore, I'll start selection MB member' names and make 'em green so I can find their posts more easily for clicking.

I guess "cutting edge" is a buzzword. I got a bingo. Lucky me.