A Prkci gene keeps stem cells in check

October 31, 2015 by Cristy Lytal, University of Southern California
The gene Prkci promotes the generation of differentiated cells (red). However if Prkci activity is reduced or absent, neural stem cells (green) are promoted. Credit: In Kyoung Mah

When it comes to stem cells, too much of a good thing isn't wonderful: producing too many new stem cells may lead to cancer; producing too few inhibits the repair and maintenance of the body.

In a paper published in Stem Cell Reports, USC researcher In Kyoung Mah from the lab of Francesca Mariani and colleagues at the University of California, San Diego, (UCSD) describe a key gene in maintaining this critical balance between producing too many and too few stem cells. Called Prkci, the gene influences whether stem cells self-renew to produce more stem cells, or differentiate into more specialized , such as blood or nerves.

In their experiments, the team grew mouse , which lacked Prkci, into embryo-like structures in the laboratory. Without Prkci, the stem cells favored self-renewal, generating large numbers of stem cells and, subsequently, an abundance of secondary structures.

Upon closer inspection, the stem cells lacking Prkci had many activated genes typical of stem cells, and some activated genes typical of neural, cardiac and blood-forming cells. Therefore, the loss of Prkci can also encourage stem cells to differentiate into the that form neurons, heart muscle and blood.

Prkci achieves these effects by activating or deactivating a well-known group of interacting genes that are part of the "Notch signaling pathway." In the absence of Prkci, the Notch pathway produces a protein that signals to stem cells to make more stem cells. In the presence of Prkci, the Notch pathway remains silent, and stem cells differentiate into specific cell types.

These findings have implications for developing patient therapies. Even though Prkci can be active in certain skin cancers, inhibiting it might lead to unintended consequences, such as tumor overgrowth. However, for patients with certain injuries or diseases, it could be therapeutic to use small molecule inhibitors to block the activity of Prkci, thus boosting stem cell production.

"We expect that our findings will be applicable in diverse contexts and make it possible to easily generate that have typically been difficult to generate," said Francesca Mariani, principal investigator at the Eli and Edythe Broad Center for Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research at USC.

Explore further: A gene called Prkci helps organize organisms and their organs

Related Stories

A step forward in obtaining blood stem cells in laboratory

October 14, 2015

An international study led by researchers from IMIM (Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute) published in the journal Nature Communications has revealed that the intensity or efficiency of the activation of a protein ...

Stem cells have more reserves for DNA replication

July 17, 2015

In cell division, nothing is as important as the precise replication of billions of genetic letters that make up DNA. Since this genomic integrity is so fundamental to survival, scientists had assumed that replication mechanisms ...

Blocking differentiation is enough to give cells 'stemness'

October 22, 2015

Though immune therapy and regenerative medicine are promising areas of research for future medical therapies, they are limited today by the difficulty of creating stem cells, and scientists around the world are searching ...

Recommended for you

How sex pheromones diversify: Lessons from yeast

January 22, 2019

Many organisms including insects, amphibians and yeasts use sex pheromones for attracting individuals of the opposite sex, but what happens to sex pheromones as new species emerge? New research publishing January 22 in the ...

36 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

JVK
1 / 5 (5) Oct 31, 2015
"...the Notch pathway produces a protein that signals to stem cells to make more stem cells. In the presence of Prkci, the Notch pathway remains silent, and stem cells differentiate into specific cell types."

Cell type differentiation is nutrient-dependent and RNA-mediated. It links atoms to ecosystems via everything known about biophysically constrained protein folding chemistry during thermodynamic cycles of protein biosynthesis and degradation that lead to successfull organism thermoregulation when the cycles are not perturbed by viruses, which are linked from mutations to all pathology.

See: http://www.cell.c...900283-0

They fail to mention that serine is important in the biosynthesis of purines and pyrimidines and that is the precursor to several amino acids including glycine, which means that most people will not link achiral glycine to the stability of all organized genomes in vertebrates.

[cont]
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Oct 31, 2015
[cont]
Journal aricle excerpt 1) "Therefore, a complete picture for the requirement of aPKCs at different stages of mammalian development has not yet emerged."

Journal aricle excerpt 2) "These studies, together with data presented here, provide genetic evidence that evolutionarily conserved polarity pathways may play a central role in NOTCH1 activation and stem cell self-renewal in mammals. Further genetic studies using Cre transgenes that are specific for progenitors in the neural plate, primitive erythrocytes, cardiomyocytes, and other progenitors to ablate aPKC function will be needed to determine how generally this mechanism is used in diverse tissues."

Arguably, these further studies will eventually link everything currently known about nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated cell type differentiation from atoms to ecosystems in all vertebrates via substitution of achiral glycine in the GnRH decapeptide, which links food odors and pheromones to their reproduction.
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Nov 02, 2015
See also: http://www.geneng...1251921/
.
Most people will not realize that the results link atoms to ecosystems in all living genera via everything currently known to serious scientists about physics, chemistry, and the conserved molecular mechanisms of RNA-mediated cell type differentiation.

The molecular mechanisms link the physiology of reproduction in microbes to the nutrient energy-dependent developmental staging that links morphological phenotypes of human hearts to behavioral phenotypes via blood flow during brain development.

Simply put, cell type differentiation in the brain does not automagically occur in the context of "evolution" via "mutations" (sudden energy jumps) that you probably were taught to believe linked natural selection to all morphological and behavioral phenotypes with no consideration for the requirement of energy-dependent RNA-mediated DNA repair.
Captain Stumpy
4.8 / 5 (5) Nov 02, 2015
not automagically occur in the context of "evolution" via "mutations"
this is an argument that is not only a false premise but also is blatantly wrong from the outset
it is also know as argumentum ad infinitum

at least it is better than your typical Definitional retreat argument and Etymological fallacy

none of the above actually support or provide evidence of your claims
"Argument by verbosity" and "Gish Gallop"
https://www.youtu...l5ntikaU

To date, you have a 100% failure rate interpreting science and being able to link your claims to actual evidence
which are linked from mutations to all pathology.
1- your own model requires mutations per your own words

2- repeating a lie doesn't make it more true
it only undermines the poster (you) and proves that you are trolling
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Nov 02, 2015
1- your own model requires mutations per your own words


See: Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model. http://www.ncbi.n...24693353

Compare it to Mutation-Driven Evolution http://www.amazon...99661731
Nei concludes: "...genomic conservation and constraint-breaking mutation is the ultimate source of all biological innovations and the enormous amount of biodiversity in this world. In this view of evolution there is no need of considering teleological elements" (p. 199).

I concluded: "the model represented here is consistent with what is known about the epigenetic effects of ecologically important nutrients and pheromones on the adaptively evolved behavior of species from microbes to man. Minimally, this model can be compared to any other factual representations of epigenesis and epistasis for determination of the best scientific 'fit'."

I used my words in their proper context above and provided links
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Nov 03, 2015
See: Nutrient-dependent/pheromone
we already saw it, and it is already falsified due to your refusal to accept known science
See also: http://media-cach...f521.jpg

I concluded
and?
when you ignore science for the sake of a religion, your conclusions mean nothing because they are tainted with the delusional belief which you are trying to prove
that isn't science, that is pseudoscience (or religion)
I used my words in their proper context above and provided links
i used your exact words QUOTED and also used links to prove it

i am not the one lying here. i proved you said the things you did
i also proved you think creationists produce legitimate science
IOW- i proved you a chronic liar, WITH YOUR OWN WORDS
QUOTED
IN CONTEXT
NOV 1- here; http://phys.org/n...yme.html

that means either you are illiterate or trying to be intentionally stupid ignoring facts
which is it?
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Nov 03, 2015
refusal to accept known science


Known science linked two RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions to the bacterial flagellum that "re-evolved" over-the-weekend.

http://www.scienc...abstract
Excerpt: Genome resequencing revealed a single-nucleotide point mutation in ntrB in strain AR2S, causing an amino acid substitution within the PAS domain of the histidine kinase sensor NtrB [Thr97→Pro97 (T97P)] (13). The fast-spreading strain AR2F had acquired an additional point mutation in the σ54-dependent EBP gene ntrC, which alters an amino acid (R442C) within the DNA binding domain (Table 1 and table S2).

Theorists claimed that the RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions were mutations, which supports my claim that all neo-Darwinian evolutionary theorists are pseudoscientists who know nothing about how cell type differentiation occurs. Theorists are biologically uninformed science idiots, like Captain Stumpy.

anonymous_9001
5 / 5 (5) Nov 03, 2015
By what mechanisms do mutations occur and by what mechanisms do substitutions occur in your model? What differentiates them causally?
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Nov 03, 2015
...you think creationists produce legitimate science...


So does Dr. Ben Carson, a neurosurgeon -- who predictably will be the next president of the United States. He and Obama have at least one similarity that goes deeper than their skin color.

Both appear to know how nutritional epigenetics and pharmacogenomics are linked by metabolic networks and genetic networks that show the difference a single nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated amino acid substitution can make to an individual of any species.

See: Obama launches a DNA data drive to revolutionize disease treatments http://fortune.co...atments/

Note: This is the known science that Captain Stumpy wants other biologically uninformed science idiots to ignore as he and others like him destroy the financial underpinnings of the United States via the cost of medical care.

Stop Stumpy and PZ Myers' other idiot minions.

Heal: Inspire: Revive
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Nov 03, 2015
The anonymous fool (aka Andrew Jones) asks:

"By what mechanisms do mutations occur and by what mechanisms do substitutions occur in your model? What differentiates them causally?" -- after claiming:

"...James Kohl presents an unsupported challenge to modern evolutionary theory and misrepresentations of established scientific terms and others' research. It was a mistake to let such a sloppy review through to be published." See: http://www.ncbi.n...4049134/

Why would anyone who does not know the difference between an amino acid substitution and a mutation claim that my review of RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions that differentiate all cell types of all individuals of all living genera claim my review was sloppy and now ask "What differentiates them [mutations and RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions] causally?"

Here's a clue: The amino acid substitutions are RNA-mediated and linked to the stability of organized genomes.

Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Nov 03, 2015
you think creationists produce legitimate science
So does Dr. Ben Carson, a neurosurgeon
@jk
ROTFLMFAO
besides being argument from authority and absurdity, do you not read the news at all? your argument that dr. c says it doesn't justify the continuation of a known lie... dr. c also believes that jail makes people gay: something demonstrably false, unless you are a delusional creationist: http://www.cbsnew...to-gays/

even YOU have made the claim that this is false, you idiot! LMFAO
Stop Stumpy and PZ Myers' other idiot minions.
You hate Myers for calling out your pseudoscience and religion
for the same reasons you hate Jones, RC, myself and vietvet

repeating the lie doesn't make it true-
any more than saying you are catholic because you once dreamed of italy so that means you can be the next pope is true

is that why you've been spreading hate posts and fanatical religion?
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Nov 03, 2015
@jk cont'd
Theorists claimed that the RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions were mutations, which supports my claim that all neo-Darwinian evolutionary theorists are pseudoscientists who know nothing about how cell type differentiation occurs
"In biology, a mutation is a permanent change of the nucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism, virus, or extrachromosomal DNA or other genetic elements. Mutations result from damage to DNA which is not repaired, errors in the process of replication, or from the insertion or deletion of segments of DNA by mobile genetic elements.[1][2][3] Mutations may or may not produce discernible changes in the observable characteristics (phenotype) of an organism
Mutation can result in several different types of change in sequences"
https://en.wikipe...Mutation

please also note 3.7 Nomenclature (Copy/paste below into the address bar)
https://en.wikipe...Mutation#Nomenclature
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Nov 03, 2015
@jk last
who does not know the difference between an amino acid substitution and a mutation
and yet, you yourself have admitted that you don't know what you are talking about
remember when I asked
DOES your model make any changes to the nucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism, virus, or extrachromosomal genetic element?
This is a yes or no answer
(this is the DEFINITION of mutation) to which you answered
YES!
--Thanks for asking
so, per your own admission here on PO, you have admitted that your own model requires MUTATIONS

this means that you don't know WTF you are talking about (still)
Plus, you've admitted elsewhere that you think definitions haven't changed since darwin's age
(see links here: http://phys.org/n...ity.html )

AND you've continually supported pseudoscience and creationist BS!

so the only person here who is demonstrated to be lying and "ignorant" of biology is you, jk
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Nov 03, 2015
RE:
The amino acid substitutions are RNA-mediated and linked to the stability of organized genomes.


That stability is manifested in the context of supercoiled DNA. Serious scientists have linked viruses to differences in supercoiled DNA for several decades. Rosalind Franklin suspected that something was wrong with the Watson and Crick model of the double helix because of her work with viruses, and Linus Pauling also had his doubts about static DNA.

This did not stop theorists from making ridiculous DNA-centric claims that include PZ Myers attack on my accurate portrayal of ecological speciation in the context of chromosomal rearrangements.

See: http://perfumingt...tations/
Excerpt: PZ Myers is an atheistic biology teacher who believes in mutation-driven evolution. Myers thinks I am "crank" and he compared me to John A. Davison, who Myers also thinks is a crank. ..." [cont]
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Nov 03, 2015
[cont] ... According to Myers, Davison was a crank for proposing a theory that Evolution was all due to chromosome rearrangements

Discussion of who's the crank ensured with more misinformation than I have ever seen spread by evolutionary theorists and atheists across 740 posts to Myers blog. Every comment I made was dismissed and usually ridiculed. Finally, I posted a link to research published yesterday that reported Estrogen receptor α polymorphism in a species with alternative behavioral phenotypes."
-------------------------
See: http://www.pnas.o...abstract

Excerpt: "...our results illustrate a detailed chain of events linking a chromosomal rearrangement to changes in overt social behavior."

My comment: We used a detailed chain of events to link RNA-mediated cell type differentiation to behavior in From Fertilization to Adult Sexual Behavior http://www.hawaii...ion.html

JVK
1 / 5 (4) Nov 03, 2015
Dr. Ben Carson and many other medical professionals understand how to link RNA-mediated cell type differentiation to behavior via nutrient-dependent base pair flipping and single amino acid substitutions. Many medical professionals know that neo-Darwinian theorists are biologically uninformed science idiots.

Only pseudoscientists have failed to grasp the pattern recognition that links atoms to ecosystems via species from microbes to man, with the honeybee model as what may always be the best example of biologically-based cause and effect.

See for the link from the honeybee model organism to human life history transitions: Oppositional COMT Val158Met effects on resting state functional connectivity in adolescents and adults http://link.sprin...4-0895-5
Vietvet
4 / 5 (4) Nov 03, 2015

Excerpt: PZ Myers is an atheistic biology teacher

@JVK

Does that mean you would be okay with a Christian biology teacher, someone like Francis Collins for instances?
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Nov 03, 2015
/perfumingt...tations/
PHISHING PSEUDOSCIENCE SITE

WARNING! do NOT CLICK JVK'S PERSONAL LINKS- they are capable of stealing personal information!

@jk, the above site is not only PHISHING, but PSEUDOSCIENCE
reported
PZ Myers attack on my accurate portrayal
No, Myers attacked your fanatical hate talk and homophobia
for evidence, see: http://freethough...s-place/

PZ Myers is an atheistic biology teacher
and degree holding professional, something you cannot claim without lying
Only pseudoscientists have failed to grasp the pattern recognition
more known lies

repeating a lie doesn't make it more true
reported
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Nov 03, 2015
Does that mean you would be okay with...


What is your point? It doesn't matter who is okay with teaching what unless they are teaching pseudoscientific nonsense about mutations and evolution at a time when all serious scientists have learned how to link the epigenetic landscape to the physical landscape of DNA via the RNA-mediated events we detailed in the molecular epigenetics section of our 1996 review.

For example, Israeli middle schools decided to start teaching the theory of evolution to students who were learning about ecology so that the students could learn the difference between pseudoscientific nonsense and biologically-based facts at the same time.

http://www.educat...olution/ "...learning about evolution is not the primary function of the decision, but rather to use it as a building block for students to learn more about their ecology."
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Nov 03, 2015
It doesn't matter who is okay with teaching what unless they are teaching pseudoscientific nonsense about mutations and evolution...
@jk
1- if you had ANY empirical evidence that could refute the Theory of Evolution, you would be a household name by now on the lips of every religious nut in the US, and worshiped by Westboro as the second second coming

2- in the scientific method, it is not enough to make a claim (see above), you must also provide empirical evidence that is then VALIDATED in order to substantiate a claim, especially one that usurps a known validated claim with empirical evidence, like the Theory of Evolution

3- an ARTICLE is NOT A STUDY

repeating a lie and an intentional misrepresentation of fact doesn't make it true

and just because you find another religious fanatic to support your claims doesn't mean they are real or true

http://media-cach...f521.jpg

reported
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Nov 03, 2015
WARNING! do NOT CLICK JVK'S PERSONAL LINKS- they are capable of stealing personal information!


Why would anyone repeatedly make such a ridiculous claim? My links are to blog sites that have been viewed by thousands of people. Even if I knew how to collect their personal information, why would I do it?

The sites are for dissemination of accurate information about biologically-based cause and effect. Can you think of any reason Captain Stumpy does not want you to see them?

Alternatively, search for "pheromones" or "RNA mediated" and look at information that does not link physics to chemistry and biology via the conserved molecular mechanisms of biologically-based cause and effect. What are they telling you about "supercoiled DNA" or cell type differentiation from stem cells to all cell types in all individuals of all living genera?

Why aren't they telling you cell type differentiation is RNA-mediated? Do they think everyone already knows that fact?



JVK
1 / 5 (4) Nov 03, 2015
1- if you had ANY empirical evidence that could refute the Theory of Evolution, you would be a household name by now


Is that what happened to Linda Buck after she co-authored: Feedback loops link odor and pheromone signaling with reproduction http://www.ncbi.n...16290036

All the claims that supported my claims in my book and the claims from our 1996 review were supported by Nobel Prize winning research, and what impact did the experimental evidence have? Who cares? See: Mae-Wan Ho: No Boundary Really Between Genetic and Epigenetic http://www.huffin...450.html

Excerpt: "...evolutionary science has now "moved on to such an extent" that she and Peter Saunders don't really care anymore about "trying to convince the neo-Darwinists."

No serious scientist cares what neo-Darwinists think. However, I suspect that Ben Carson knows their ignorant attacks will help him win the election.
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Nov 03, 2015
Captain Stumpy's attacks on me can be compared to the attacks of other biologically uninformed science idiots on Dr. Ben Carson.

I think that everyone here knows that. But, as a reminder, the topic here is "stem cell differentiation," not religious beliefs. The substitution of achiral glycine in position 6 of the GnRH molecule in all vertebrates links the stability of all their organized genomes.

See:Evolution of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) structure and its receptor
http://www.ifzz.p...05〈=en

Excerpt: "It should be stressed that the surprising total conservation of GnRH II's primary structure, from bony fish to man, appears to be a result of the excellent coordinated evolutionary selection of amino acids participating in binding, activation and configuration such that its structure cannot be improved by substitution with any natural amino acid at any position."

[cont]
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Nov 04, 2015
[cont]

"The discovery of the fact that one decapeptide molecule, among the GnRHs, was constructed perfectly at the beginning of 400 million years evolution and that it is not possible to improve its physiological potency using the any natural amino acid is, in my opinion, important, fascinating and beautiful."

My comment: The discovery that the bacterial flagellum re-evolved over-the-weekend eliminates the claims about 400 million years of evolution because GnRH links the nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled cell type differentiation in bacteria to nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled cell type differentiation in all vertebrates via the biophysically constrained chemistry of RNA-mediated protein folding chemistry in all living genera.

For comparison, mutations are linked from viruses to genomic entropy, not to cell type differentiation. Viruses perturb protein folding which links them to the undifferentiated cell types of cancer.
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Nov 04, 2015
Heal: Inspire: Revive (or help someone like Dr. Ben Carson to do so)

Remove people like Captain Stumpy, Richard Dawkins, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Andrew Jones, Steven Taylor, and PZ Myers from any further consideration whatsoever.

They are biologically uninformed science idiots who are killing your loved ones by touting their ridiculous theories. Help to stop them, or consider yourself an accessory to the suffering and death caused by neo-Darwinian theorists during the past century.

Join the folks from Baylor who are "Combating Evolution to Fight Disease" by publishing in Science http://www.scienc...88.short or with a parody that politely calls Neil de Grasse Tyson a big ass.

https://www.youtu...youtu.be All About that Base (Meghan Trainor Parody)
Vietvet
4.2 / 5 (5) Nov 04, 2015
"Molecular biology and evolutionary biology have been separate disciplines and scientific cultures: The former is mechanistic and focused on molecules; the latter is theoretical and focused on populations

Okay.

"However, these domains are beginning to converge in laboratories addressing molecular mechanisms that explain how evolutionary processes work, and bring these processes to bear on medical problems such as cancer and infectious disease."

Good

" Each discipline can be viewed as a missing link in the other's description of biology, and in medicine."
http://www.scienc...88.short

Bingo!

Do you get it now, jvk?

Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Nov 04, 2015
why would I do it?
@jk
why do you continue to promote a blatant lie like creationism while refusing to accept empirical evidence?
http://www.ploson...tion=PDF

The sites are for dissemination of accurate information
if this is the case, why does your sites contain religion & creationism?
that is NOT accurate, nor is it science: it is PSEUDOSCIENCE
see https://en.wikipe...Arkansas

Remove people like Captain Stumpy, Richard Dawkins, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Andrew Jones, Steven Taylor, and PZ Myers from any further consideration whatsoever
so, you can't appeal to the evidence, thus you change tactics to get rid of the people?

and you consider that logical?

reported for pseudoscience
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Nov 04, 2015
@jk cont'd

Remove people like Captain Stumpy, Richard Dawkins, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Andrew Jones, Steven Taylor, and PZ Myers from any further consideration whatsoever.

They are biologically uninformed science idiots who are killing your loved ones by touting their ridiculous theories. Help to stop them, or consider yourself an accessory to the suffering and death caused by neo-Darwinian theorists during the past century
and you can't see the fanatical religious overtones in this appeal to hate and prejudice?

basically you are saying: "I have no evidence and i can't prove anything i say, so you should go out and hate on anyone who has an education or can prove anything"
or help someone like Dr. Ben Carson to do so
the man who thinks Jail can make you gay is the antithesis of education or empirical evidence

this is jk defined
http://media-cach...f521.jpg
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Nov 04, 2015
Ecological speciation. Get it, theorists? http://rna-mediat...eorists/

Conclusion:
Energy-dependent supercoiled DNA and cell type differentiation via the physiology of reproduction and fixation of RNA-mediated substitutions lead to ecological speciation. Theft of energy by viruses links the proliferation of viral microRNAs to failed DNA repair and pathology. Across a lifetime of nutrient-stress and/or social stress, the innate immune system of all cells in all tissues of all organs in all our organ systems is suppressed and we often needlessly suffer and die because neo-Darwinian theorists claim that random mutations are sometimes beneficial when stress-driven accumulation of mutations always leads to pathology.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Nov 04, 2015
/rna-mediat...eorists/
PHISHING PSEUDOSCIENCE SITE
this site contains PSEUDOSCIENCE

you can't link reputable peer reviewed journal links to an article or study?
this is your personal site which mixes pseudoscience religion and bad interpretations of reality

.
reported
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Nov 04, 2015
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Nov 04, 2015
See also: http://medicalxpr...ver.html

The mechanism is nutrient-dependent and RNA-mediated. It links metabolic networks to genetic networks via single amino acid substitutions linked to morphological phenotypes and behavioral phenotypes via chromosomal rearrangements in all vertebrates.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Nov 05, 2015
rnasociety.org/
@jk
from your own link
We are a multidisciplinary society, representing molecular, evolutionary and structural biology, biochemistry, biomedical sciences, chemistry, genetics, and virology as they relate to questions of the structure and function of RNA and of ribonucleoprotein assemblies.
http://www.rnasoc...society/

notice the part about evolutionary and structural biology?
ROTFLMFAO

also note: the differences between your site and theirs is clearly visible!

there is not one mention of creationist dogma on that site. there is also no overwhelming need to post religious or other BS in an attempt to sell snake oil

This site is a society run by EDUCATED REAL SCIENTISTS who seek answers
and they deserve respect for their hard work

this is exactly opposite of your site, which includes religious arguments & creationism along with science, thus making your site PSEUDOSCIENCE
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Nov 05, 2015
notice the part about evolutionary and structural biology?


What functional structures evolved? Are you claiming the bacterial flagellum first evolved and then "re-evolved" in four days during an accidental experiment?

I'm claiming that no serious scientists believe in the pseudoscientific nonsense that you attribute to members of the RNA society.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (1) Nov 05, 2015
What functional structures evolved?
@jk
1- in the link you posted here? http://www.rnasoc...society/

2- red-herring & distraction from your false argument
Are you claiming the bacterial flagellum first evolved and then "re-evolved" in four days during an accidental experiment?
try reading what i wrote
I'm claiming that no serious scientists believe in the pseudoscientific nonsense that you attribute to members of the RNA society
based upon my above post?
really?

ok, i'll ask them and quote you and your comments!

JVK
1 / 5 (2) Nov 05, 2015
ok, i'll ask them and quote you and your comments!


No you won't! You will take my comments and quote them out of context, and place their responses into the context of what you baited them into saying.

That's what biologically uninformed science idiots and anonymous fools do. They think they do it well, but it exposes their simple-mindedness.

Ask any serious scientist if the bacterial flagellum could evolve in four days or re-evolve in four days. Ask them to cite any literature that they think supports such a pseudoscientific claim.

For example, here's the latest attempt by Michael Lynch and his co-author to eliminate "The bioenergetic costs of a gene" by placing de novo gene creation into the tree of life via the power of random genetic drift and the historical view that pseudoscientists share about cellular architecture and diversification of organized genomes.

http://www.pnas.o...abstract

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.