Scientists Discover Parallel Codes In Genes
“These parallel codes were probably exploited during evolution to allow genes to support a wide range of signals to regulate and modify biological processes in cells.” says Shalev Itzkovitz at The Weizmann Institute of Science.
You know for many years I’ve been taking care to avoid saying men evolved from apes because the pedant dominated science establishment is quick to point out that we and apes descend from a common ancestor and anyone who thinks we evolved from apes clearly doesn’t understand evolution. So now we have arguably the most recognized living name in paleontology, Richard Leakey, blurting out the proverbial “I’m so stupid I don’t know what common ancestry means”. What are we to make of that? I’m sure our good pedant friends in the science establishment, through Panda’s Thumb or some member blog, will let us know upon reading this. HT to Larry at I’m From Missouri.
Someone in California has created a website dedicated to potential cancer wonder-drug DCA (dichloroacetate). Pass the word. The DCA Site – Updating You on DCA and Cancer
Thanks to so many people making so much racket on the internet this potential wonder-drug is finally getting noticed. Let’s keep up the pressure. New Cure for Cancer: Truth or Dare? by Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, American Cancer Society, for ABC News There is the medical equivalent of a tsunami wave building out there, only we don’t know where this one is going to land. It is called DCA, and we at the American Cancer Society are suddenly receiving requests for information about something few if any of us had heard about as a cancer treatment until this past week. Read the rest at the link and also visit Dr. Len’s Cancer blog.
Well this is sure nothing new to people familiar with persecution of scientists in support of ID.
Great informative article by Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball.
Excerpts follow. Read the whole article at Canada Free Press.
This is what happens when good science goes bad. It’s the same story with orthodox evolution theory.
You tell me who is playing fair: Richard Dawkins: 4 December 2006 http://news.independent.co.uk/people/profiles/article2037496.ece Why have you not engaged in public debate with Alister McGrath, Mary Midgley, Michael Ruse, Keith Ward, or indeed anyone else who would present you with a serious challenge? JAMES RADFORD, By e-mail RD: The producers of my Channel 4 documentary [Root of All Evil?] invited the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster and the Chief Rabbi to be interviewed by me. All declined, doubtless for good reasons. I don’t enjoy the debate format, but I once had a public debate with the then Archbishop of York, and The Observer quoted the verdict of one disconsolate clergyman as he left the hall: “That was easy Read More ›
Scott Adams offers some insights on P. Z. Myers, prefacing them as follows: . . . Some people are quite certain that I am misusing my minor celebrity status to confuse the masses and turn them into creationists or pyramid worshipers. Is it intentional, they wonder? Do I really believe the things I write? Or am I simply stupid, as it appears. . . . MORE
Edmonton Global News television report on dichloroacetate cancer cure and interview with discoverer Dr. Evangelos Michelakis, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta. Click here to watch.
In case anyone was wondering, the international patent application for DCA as a cancer cure is available for anyone to read. DCA is an inexpensive, uncontrolled chemical hailed as a potential cure for cancer that anyone can buy. This is not an endorsement or encouragement for anyone to self-medicate. It is intended solely to get the attention of established clinicians with experience in orphan drug testing.
Get this from Orac (a.k.a. DH Gorski) at Respectful Insolence. Here’s a cutter/researcher who makes a living from cancer. A respectable number of research papers in chemotherapy and radiation bear his name and he’s a surgeon. He is, in other words, a fully vested member in the multi-billion dollar cancer treatment industry. If there’s a big breakthrough cure for cancer that consists of a $2 teaspoonful of a common chemical in a glass of water the good Doctor Gorski becomes like unto a horse drawn carriage maker when Ford started mass producing automobiles. He’ll be reduced to lancing boils for a living.
Cheap, safe drug kills most cancers
New Scientist has received an unprecedented amount of interest in this story from readers. If you would like up-to-date information on any plans for clinical trials of DCA in patients with cancer, or would like to donate towards a fund for such trials, please visit the site set up by the University of Alberta and the Alberta Cancer Board. We will also follow events closely and will report any progress as it happens.
It sounds almost too good to be true: a cheap and simple drug that kills almost all cancers by switching off their “immortalityâ€Â. The drug, dichloroacetate (DCA), has already been used for years to treat rare metabolic disorders and so is known to be relatively safe.
There is a new paper on Irreducible Complexity by renowned mathematician Gregory Chaitin: The Halting Probability Omega: Irreducible Complexity in Pure Mathematics Milan Journal of Mathematics, Vol. 75, 2007.
Ω is an extreme case of total lawlessness; in effect, it shows that God plays dice in pure mathematics.
On the surface Chaitin’s notion of Irreducible Complexity (IC) in math may seem totally irrelevant to Irreducible Complexity (IC) in ID literature. But let me argue that notion of IC in math relates to IC in physics which may point to some IC in biology…
First, of consider this article archived at Access Research Network (ARN) by George Johnson in the NY Times on IC in physics:
Challenging Particle Physics as Path to Truth
Many complex systems  the very ones the solid-staters study  appear to be irreducible.
The concept of “irreducible complexity” has been used by Alan Turing, Michael Behe, and perhaps now by physicists. Behe’s sense of irreducible is not too far from the sense of irreducible in the context of this physics. If biological systems take advantage of irreducible phenomena in physics (for example, what if we discover the brain uses irreducible physical phenomena ) we will have a strong proof by contradiction that there are no Darwinian pathways for biolgoical systems to incorporate that phenomena.
The possibility of IC in physics may be tied to IC in math and this may have relevance to IC in biology.
Read More ›
Australian ID critic Robyn Williams recently interviewed Melbourne neuroscientist John Reid, who is also a self-proclaimed expert in overpopulation and how to deal with it. Eric Pianka was the talk of this blog last year for recommending Ebola as the instrument of choice for reducing the world’s population by 90 percent (use UD’s search feature on his name). It seems that Eric and John need to pool their talents. In case you haven’t met, Eric, meet John; John, meet Eric. There, I’ve done my good deed for the day.
For a taste of where John Reid is going, consider:
[H]umanity has been all too compliant with the Biblical injunction to be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. The precepts of the Abrahamic religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam represent the quintessential perversion of the human mind. They must be abandoned and the notion of the sanctity of human life must be subjugated to the greater sanctity of all life on Earth.
Here is the full transcript: Read More ›