Another Hit for the Cassiopaeans - DNA

[Possibility of Being]

Sure thought about it too! But it seems there is more data needed, more research in this direction.

 

[SeekinTruth]

Geeze, the implications...

What if one of the ways they changed the DNA of all humanity was the introduction of agriculture...?

That's what I've been thinking ever since reading Deep Nutrition! And this seem to only have gotten worse in the past 1-2 centuries. The number of cases of gluten sensitivity has increased dramatically, and people are getting sicker and stupider by the generation... GMOs, vegetable oils, refined sugars and flours, nutrient-depleted foods, countless harmful and potentially harmful chemicals, etc. etc. Who knows what else is going on.

Yup. It all started about 8,000 to 10,000 years ago, and it's been all downhill ever since. Like you said, getting MUCH worse, it seems, the last couple of centuries, and especially the last 100 years or so. In fact, the indescribable damage to humans AND the planet is just getting increasingly worse -- accelerating at alarming speed -- in the last few decades.

And just to add to your list of damaging foods/additives, there's also "fiber enriched" cereals and other foods with EXTRA added fiber, so the damage from fiber has really gone to new levels also in the last 100 to 150 years. And I'm sure even with all the details we know, there's still some that haven't come to light or all the detriments are not yet known. Oh, and there's all the highly toxic packaging too. It just goes on and on.

 

[dannybananny]

It makes sense in a way if our body need higher 2D sustenance for growth and intelligence(emotional also) through which consciousness can be expressed. Maybe people eating lower 2D sustenance are becoming like animals that eat that also, that is, only their predator mind is working because of their DNA, they lack information, energy and can't develop further to increase intelligence and consciousness. They decrease it because their DNA is changing to accumulate lower frequencies. So by only having healthy diet men can achieve much in terms of energy, but I suppose diet is only one part of story with work and knowledge also involved, because it doesn't get you any where if you don't use that energy in constructive way. Very interesting information, thanks for sharing.

 

[seek10]

It is an indisputable fact that humans crave fat

[...]

Why do we crave fat so much?

It's because animal fat is the primary constituent of the evolutionary human diet.

Our guts.

It takes a much larger gut, and much more energy, to digest plant matter and turn it into an animal than it does to eat an animal and turn it into an animal. This is why herbivores have large, complicated guts with extra chambers (e.g. the rumen and abomasum), and carnivores have smaller, shorter, less complicated guts.

The caloric and nutritional density of meat allowed our mostly-frugivorous guts to shrink so that our brains could expand - and our larger brains allowed us to become better at hunting, scavenging, and making tools to help us hunt and scavenge. This positive feedback loop allowed our brains to grow from perhaps 350cc ("Lucy") to over 1500cc (late Pleistocene hunters)!

In further support of this theory, the brains of modern humans, eating a grain-based agricultural diet, have shrunk by 10% or more as compared to late Pleistocene hunters and fishers.

This explains why vegetarian athletes are much heavier than meat eating athletes.
Heck, the way the entire vegetarian gang twisted this concept . They claim" carbs are less complex , so easy to digest than meats ".

 

[un chien anadolu]

Geeze, the implications...

What if one of the ways they changed the DNA of all humanity was the introduction of agriculture...?

But isn't one of the major points of low carb high animal protein&fat diet the fact that our genes are almost the same as our ancestors' long long before agriculture ?

From Primal Body, Primal Mind

99,99% of our genes were formed before the development of agriculture.

S. Boyd Eaton, MD, Medical anthropologist

As a species, we are essentially genetically identical with respect to genetic expression, regardless of blood type, to those humans living more than forty thousand years ago. Our physiology is fundamentally the same as that of people from the Paleolithic Era, which refers to the human evolutionary time period spanning from roughly 2.6 million to about ten thousand years ago-before the dawn of agriculture.

However maybe this 99,99% (which is an approximation i guess) and the remaining 0,01% is the key, and what we're talking about here.

Also from the same book

Recent estimations assert that agriculture was not widely implemented in Europe untill little more than two thousand years ago. By most accounts, it takes roughly forthy thousand to one hundred thousand years for human genetic expression to adapt significantly to such a major change. We have yet to physiologically adapt to the agricultural revolution.

(emphasis mine)

Maybe i am misinterpreting something here or maybe the change process is still in progress and we're not too late.

 

[seek10]

Recent estimations assert that agriculture was not widely implemented in Europe untill little more than two thousand years ago. By most accounts, it takes roughly forthy thousand to one hundred thousand years for human genetic expression to adapt significantly to such a major change. We have yet to physiologically adapt to the agricultural revolution.

(emphasis mine)

Maybe i am misinterpreting something here or maybe the change process is still in progress and we're not too late.

Probably you are right ( still not too late), IF No other external things happens to the human evolution for next 30 to 100 thousand years. It's already too late for repairing this problem for majority of the population. It's interesting C's says these carbon based enzymes, DNA contains, is effected by very low frequencies. We swim in the so much of radiations, very difficult to control( for most of the masses).

 

[Ben]

Geeze, the implications...

What if one of the ways they changed the DNA of all humanity was the introduction of agriculture...?

But isn't one of the major points of low carb high animal protein&fat diet the fact that our genes are almost the same as our ancestors' long long before agriculture ?

From Primal Body, Primal Mind

99,99% of our genes were formed before the development of agriculture.

S. Boyd Eaton, MD, Medical anthropologist

As a species, we are essentially genetically identical with respect to genetic expression, regardless of blood type, to those humans living more than forty thousand years ago. Our physiology is fundamentally the same as that of people from the Paleolithic Era, which refers to the human evolutionary time period spanning from roughly 2.6 million to about ten thousand years ago-before the dawn of agriculture.

However maybe this 99,99% (which is an approximation i guess) and the remaining 0,01% is the key, and what we're talking about here.

Also from the same book

Recent estimations assert that agriculture was not widely implemented in Europe untill little more than two thousand years ago. By most accounts, it takes roughly forthy thousand to one hundred thousand years for human genetic expression to adapt significantly to such a major change. We have yet to physiologically adapt to the agricultural revolution.

(emphasis mine)

Maybe i am misinterpreting something here or maybe the change process is still in progress and we're not too late.

Well epigenetics may play an important part. We may have the same genes in many cases but their expression is controlled by other factors such as dietary and environmental toxicity. In other words, the DNA is literally damaged during the lifetime of a person.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

But isn't one of the major points of low carb high animal protein&fat diet the fact that our genes are almost the same as our ancestors' long long before agriculture ?

From Primal Body, Primal Mind

99,99% of our genes were formed before the development of agriculture.

S. Boyd Eaton, MD, Medical anthropologist

As a species, we are essentially genetically identical with respect to genetic expression, regardless of blood type, to those humans living more than forty thousand years ago. Our physiology is fundamentally the same as that of people from the Paleolithic Era, which refers to the human evolutionary time period spanning from roughly 2.6 million to about ten thousand years ago-before the dawn of agriculture.

However maybe this 99,99% (which is an approximation i guess) and the remaining 0,01% is the key, and what we're talking about here.

Also from the same book

Recent estimations assert that agriculture was not widely implemented in Europe untill little more than two thousand years ago. By most accounts, it takes roughly forthy thousand to one hundred thousand years for human genetic expression to adapt significantly to such a major change. We have yet to physiologically adapt to the agricultural revolution.

(emphasis mine)

Maybe i am misinterpreting something here or maybe the change process is still in progress and we're not too late.

Well epigenetics may play an important part. We may have the same genes in many cases but their expression is controlled by other factors such as dietary and environmental toxicity. In other words, the DNA is literally damaged during the lifetime of a person.

Yeah. Our genes are pretty much the same as they were 30,000 years go, but that's not the same as their expression. The healthy expression of our genome relies on adequate nutrition. But when our bodies get poison instead, it tells our genes that something is wrong, and they change their expression to adapt to the information they're receiving from the food. So a mother's epigenetic expression may be changed for the worse, and those changes can be passed down to her offspring.

 

[Laura]

I was referring to what the Cs said about our DNA being truncated/factors cancelled or suppressed.

 

[un chien anadolu]

But isn't one of the major points of low carb high animal protein&fat diet the fact that our genes are almost the same as our ancestors' long long before agriculture ?

From Primal Body, Primal Mind

99,99% of our genes were formed before the development of agriculture.

S. Boyd Eaton, MD, Medical anthropologist

As a species, we are essentially genetically identical with respect to genetic expression, regardless of blood type, to those humans living more than forty thousand years ago. Our physiology is fundamentally the same as that of people from the Paleolithic Era, which refers to the human evolutionary time period spanning from roughly 2.6 million to about ten thousand years ago-before the dawn of agriculture.

However maybe this 99,99% (which is an approximation i guess) and the remaining 0,01% is the key, and what we're talking about here.

Also from the same book

Recent estimations assert that agriculture was not widely implemented in Europe untill little more than two thousand years ago. By most accounts, it takes roughly forthy thousand to one hundred thousand years for human genetic expression to adapt significantly to such a major change. We have yet to physiologically adapt to the agricultural revolution.

(emphasis mine)

Maybe i am misinterpreting something here or maybe the change process is still in progress and we're not too late.

Well epigenetics may play an important part. We may have the same genes in many cases but their expression is controlled by other factors such as dietary and environmental toxicity. In other words, the DNA is literally damaged during the lifetime of a person.

Yeah. Our genes are pretty much the same as they were 30,000 years go, but that's not the same as their expression. The healthy expression of our genome relies on adequate nutrition. But when our bodies get poison instead, it tells our genes that something is wrong, and they change their expression to adapt to the information they're receiving from the food. So a mother's epigenetic expression may be changed for the worse, and those changes can be passed down to her offspring.

Ah OK, thanks that makes sense.

 

[kVandi]

Would anyone like to take a look at this link? http://viewzone2.com/dna.html It discusses dna as light and the communication betweens cells, and goes on to try to describe the development of cancer. Also mentions taking the light frequency from a frog embryo's dna molecule, and transferring it via laser to a salamander embryo causing it to mutate into a completely normal frog. It talks about more as well.

I had this same experience this week when I was sent an article where a Russian (again) scientist, Pjotr Garjajev, had managed to intercept communication from a DNA molecule in the form of ultraviolet photons -- light! What's more, he claimed to have captured this communication from one organism (a frog embryo) with a laser beam and then transmitted it to another organisms DNA (a salamander embryo), causing the latter embryo to develop into a frog!

Great research by Russian scientists yet again, in my opinion.

 

[bngenoh]

This video is about the relation of the jaw muscle and brain cavity size in human evolution, and how a single mutation leading to a decrease of our jaw muscle's size and strength, allowed our brains to expand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0D_k4lYrdo&feature=related

Very interesting, because it takes far less jaw power to eat meat than it does plants. Also interesting, is that in the video when they are talking about how our ancestors switched from brawn to brain, they have the image superimposed of a deer kill, and one of the hunters is preparing it. Interesting, very, very interesting.

If you want a fuller documentary about genetics which also includes the work by Dr. Hansell Stedman. "I" recommend watching the documentary "What Darwin Never Knew"

Here: http://video.pbs.org/video/1372073556/

It's also on youtube, but i like to watch stuff like this as one whole sequence.

 

[Biomiast]

Hi to all,

This thread is on my mind for some time, especially superconductor properties of DNA and this DNA core that is an undiscovered enzyme related to carbon.

I don't know if I am thinking this correctly but among all the atoms and structure of DNA, there is nothing that would make DNA a superconductor and not any research in that direction that I am aware of. So I started to think, maybe this "core related to carbon" is the one that is superconductor. The reason I brought this up is that there is a relatively new nanomaterial called Carbon Nanotube that may be a candidate for this core, or something similar to it, I think.

A little background: Carbon Nanotubes(CNT) are cylinder shaped tubes that are composed of only carbon atoms. This unique bonding creates additional electrical conductivity, thermal conductivity properties as well as unique optical properties etc. Additional information here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_nanotube

I think that they may be some proto-version of this enzyme C's were talking about. CNTs are known to interact with DNA. DNA wraps around this tubule structure as shown in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJUaIIYN7y4&feature=related

Being something similar to CNT at the core of DNA molecules, they can be superconductors and they may have other interesting physical properties. Of course, these are all just wild guesses, at the time.

My two cents, fwiw.

 

[bngenoh]

Regarding all that has been said in this thread, especially the implications of diet, ie the evils of agriculture, there is this:

A newly identified form of DNA - small circles of non-repetitive sequences - may be widespread in somatic cells of mice and humans, according to a study in this week's issue of Science. These extrachromosomal bits of DNA, dubbed microDNA, may be the byproducts of microdeletions in chromosomes, meaning that cells all over the body may have their own constellation of missing pieces of DNA.

[...]

Anindya Dutta, who studies DNA replication at the University of Virginia, and his colleagues were aiming to investigate intrachromosomal shuffling of genes in mouse brain tissue - where recombination at homologous sequences could create extra loops of DNA - but the widespread nature, size, and sequences of the DNA they turned up surprised them.

After purifying the nuclear DNA from mouse brain tissue samples, the researchers targeted and digested the linear DNA, leaving only circular pieces behind. After enriching and sequencing the circular DNA, the scientists saw that they the circles tended to be small, most 200-400 base pair long, and non-repetitive. Dutta argues that this distinguishes them from previously characterized extrachromosomal circles, like small polydispersed DNA, which are often enriched for repeated sequences. They repeated the experiment with other mouse tissues and human cell lines.

Going back to the linear DNA they had originally discarded, Dutta's group was able to correlate microDNAs with specific locations where microdeletions had occurred, suggesting that bits of DNA were being excised from the genome and forming independent circles. If true, that would mean that somatic tissues are subject to a higher and more widespread degree of mosaicism than previously thought, said Dutta, meaning that the genomic DNA in the cells of a given tissue don't all match.

It's unclear what processes underlie microDNA formation, but it's most likely they occur during DNA replication or repair. Beyond that, the researchers determined that microDNAs are rich in cytosines and guanines, and tend to cluster at the 5' untranslated areas, exons, and CpG islands. To Dutta, this information suggests the possibility that nucleosomes important for gene regulation may be involved. These tend to be fall in the 5' end of genes, and DNA wrapping could explain microDNA size, which roughly corresponds to the length of DNA entwined on a nucleosome. What DNA repair processes are being used to produce microDNA is ripe for investigating, said Dutta.

Source: https://www.sott.net/articles/show/242683-DNA-Discovery-New-Type-

Perhaps, microDNA & microRNA mediate epigenetics. That they have found microDNA in mice, microRNA in plants would tend to suggest that micoDNA & RNA, are found throughout the biosphere. What comes to mind is what the C's have said about poor diet lowering one's vibrations, perhaps it is because when one eats plants and their microRNA gets into one's body, it binds or otherwise effects the genome. Since plants are 1st density and animals 2nd density, there is a much greater difference in the composition, in the broadest sense of the word between a meal of 1D and 2D. In that 2D is much "closer" to 3D, than 1D.

A corresponding association is about the high fat, moderate protein, low to no carb diet that alot here have taken up. Since the primary energy source is fat, and depending on the fat, butter, coconut oil etc, the concentration of microRNA would probably be less. That would mean that the genomic interference would be less osit, then it stands to reason, that more and more of the genome of the individual would start to be expressed, granted it won't just happen, and even if it did, would one really be able to handle the change in perception that comes with it without loosing one's marbles? That's highly unlikely. Indefatigable efforts must made in order to use the conditions set up by the diet osit.

 

[SeekinTruth]

Since plants are 1st density and animals 2nd density, there is a much greater difference in the composition, in the broadest sense of the word between a meal of 1D and 2D. In that 2D is much "closer" to 3D, than 1D.

Just a note. Plants AND animals are 2D -- at least that's my general understanding. 1D is generally "below the level of consciousness," i.e. inanimate matter where ONLY mechanical laws apply.