Freethought & Rationalism Archive

LiveFreeOrDie · 07-06-2002, 06:36 AM

A creationist from another web site posted a link to the following article in Harper's, which I actually found quite interesting.

<a href="http://www.mindfully.org/GE/GE4/DNA-Myth-CommonerFeb02.htm" target="_blank">http://www.mindfully.org/GE/GE4/DNA-Myth-CommonerFeb02.htm</A>

This quote will kinda give you the gist of the article:

Quote:

The wonders of genetic science are all founded on the discovery of the DNA double helix-by Francis Crick and James Watson in 1953-and they proceed from the premise that this molecular structure is the exclusive agent of inheritance in all living things: in the kingdom of molecular genetics, the DNA gene is absolute monarch. Known to molecular biologists as the "central dogma," the premise assumes that an organism's genome-its total complement of DNA genes---should fully account for its characteristic assemblage of inherited traits.7 The premise, unhappily, is false.

Any thoughts from the resident II experts?

MortalWombat · 07-06-2002, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Known to molecular biologists as the "central dogma," the premise assumes that an organism's genome-its total complement of DNA genes---should fully account for its characteristic assemblage of inherited traits

This is what is commonly known as bullshit. The <a href="http://esg-www.mit.edu:8001/esgbio/dogma/dogma.html" target="_blank">Central Dogma</a> has always referred to DNA -> RNA -> Protein. I don't know where they get their definition.

tgamble · 07-06-2002, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MortalWombat:

This is what is commonly known as bullshit. The <a href="http://esg-www.mit.edu:8001/esgbio/dogma/dogma.html" target="_blank">Central Dogma</a> has always referred to DNA -> RNA -> Protein. I don't know where they get their definition.

Is it just me or does "central dogma" have a kind of religious feel to it?

pseudobug · 07-06-2002, 07:09 AM

I find it hard to believe that Mr./Dr? Commoner has really had anything to do with molecular genetics in his career.

First, he answers/provides a mechanism that explains the "failing of the Genome project" to find a sufficient number of genes to explain the complexity of human's inherited traits--alternative splicing.

Another problem is that he doesn't even touch on the temporal and spatial expression of genes in development--particularly early development. That alone can potentially explain many of the intra- and interspecies differences.

I don't have much time to delve into this yo-yo Nader-clone's handwaving. Just as a summary though--his case and point is weak.

[ July 06, 2002: Message edited by: pseudobug ]

RufusAtticus · 07-06-2002, 11:32 AM

From what I can gather Dr. Commoner is an environmental activist. As such, he doesn't like the idea of genetic engineering. I think his politics encourage him to pronounce the untimely death of genetic engineering.

~~RvFvS~~

RufusAtticus · 07-06-2002, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tgamble:


Is it just me or does "central dogma" have a kind of religious feel to it?

Yeah. Francis Crick described it as such and it has kind of stuck.

The Lone Ranger · 07-06-2002, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RufusAtticus:

From what I can gather Dr. Commoner is an environmental activist. As such, he doesn't like the idea of genetic engineering. I think his politics encourage him to pronounce the untimely death of genetic engineering.

Yes, exactly. Commoner is well-known in environmental circles, and he has not infrequently been called a "Neo-Luddite." I think that it's more than fair to suspect that his politics have influenced his views regarding the subject of genetic engineering.

While I'm not generally a big fan of Reason, there's an interesting article <a href="http://reason.com/rb/rb013002.shtml" target="_blank">here.</a>

Quote:

Originally posted by tgamble:

Is it just me or does "central dogma" have a kind of religious feel to it?

It's my understanding that it was originally meant as a joke to refer to it as the "central dogma." Unfortunately, a lot of people seem to have forgotten that.

Cheers,

Michael

MattMarengo · 07-06-2002, 05:28 PM

Most references in my undergrad bio classes to the "Central Dogma" have, in fact, been ironic. This is especially apt since DNA--->RNA---> protein does not hold in at least two cases:

retroviruses (eg HIV) RNA--->DNA--->RNA--->protein
prions (eg BSE aka mad cow): proteins---->more proteins

Matt

LiveFreeOrDie · 07-06-2002, 06:59 PM

Thanks, all.

07-06-2002, 07:09 AM	#4
pseudobug Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: land of confusion Posts: 178	I find it hard to believe that Mr./Dr? Commoner has really had anything to do with molecular genetics in his career. First, he answers/provides a mechanism that explains the "failing of the Genome project" to find a sufficient number of genes to explain the complexity of human's inherited traits--alternative splicing. Another problem is that he doesn't even touch on the temporal and spatial expression of genes in development--particularly early development. That alone can potentially explain many of the intra- and interspecies differences. I don't have much time to delve into this yo-yo Nader-clone's handwaving. Just as a summary though--his case and point is weak. [ July 06, 2002: Message edited by: pseudobug ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-06-2002, 11:32 AM	#5
RufusAtticus Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NCSU Posts: 5,853	From what I can gather Dr. Commoner is an environmental activist. As such, he doesn't like the idea of genetic engineering. I think his politics encourage him to pronounce the untimely death of genetic engineering. ~~RvFvS~~

07-06-2002, 05:28 PM	#8
MattMarengo Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Urbana, IL, USA Posts: 7	Most references in my undergrad bio classes to the "Central Dogma" have, in fact, been ironic. This is especially apt since DNA--->RNA---> protein does not hold in at least two cases: retroviruses (eg HIV) RNA--->DNA--->RNA--->protein prions (eg BSE aka mad cow): proteins---->more proteins Matt

07-06-2002, 06:59 PM	#9
LiveFreeOrDie Junior Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Milwaukee, WI, USA Posts: 77	Thanks, all.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.