Engrams, DNA and Genetics-a Study by One ExScn

[Smilla]

A Dog?

Where?

 

[La La Lou Lou]

Man's best friend is a dog, old english saying.

Old english people never knew how right they were.

Dogs are much better friends than fat old ginger meglamanic control freeks!

 

[Smilla]

Man's best friend is a dog, old english saying.

Old english people never knew how right they were.

Dogs are much better friends than fat old ginger meglamanic control freeks!

Yes, dogs are noble creatures with a loving soul. I often feel humbled by the emotional honesty of dogs. Bless them. And bless you too.

 

[Markus]

What is science, what is truth, what is intelligence?

very well stated. this is an interesting thread, and something i've been thinking about for a bit. its a problem for me, as now, my "stable datum" has been shaken and i need to find out what's real and what's not. this board has been very helpful in filling in the gaps for me. i'm glad there is a thread like this one now. i'd be interested to see any other contributions to the collection of this data. i'm not saying one person is wrong and one person is right, just that i'd like to see what people have to say so i can decide for myself what seems true.

It is allways a matter how the "scientist" defines it. What is real and important for him or her! We are human beings and thus we will never be able to be objective. Hubbard was human - I am human - you are human we all have different viewpoints. But yes it is very important to listen to different viewpoints (as you stated above Still In) and never to be sure that you have found the perfect and only truth as Hubbard did.

Let me contribute my part to this thread.
As some of you may already know I'm working with handicapped people since almost 20 years. In Nazi Germany handicapped people were killed because the Nazi leaders considered them to be a huge burden for the society and they did the same with the Jews. In the beginning the Nazis seemed to have very good results for the society - so in that time you would have found many "scientists" in Germany but even in many other countries who could "proof" to you that Hitler and his followers did exactly the right thing in eliminating this "burden" from the society. We all know the real end result for the German society....

I ask you now - what is intelligence - what is good for a society and what is bad. Who is usefull - who is not? Hubbard claimed that he sorted all out for us - like the Nazis did. And I say - "what a nonsense!"
How usefull is an OT 8 father who has disconnected from his son only because he is attacking his "religion" for the society? How usefull is a woman with Down Syndrome when she spots the pain of this heartbroken son everytime he comes into the home and is hugging him to help him to ease this pain.
For me the answer is very clear.....
And don't get me wrong - I even can learn about life by dealing with such a heartless father - he is helping me in learning what is important in life and what is not..... and I still love him, because I understand what huge pain forced him into this stupid cult. And I will allways communicate with him - but still I will not back down in attacking his abusive organization.

I will never understand how stupid someone could be and kill a person with Down Syndrome. I never will understand why my father is not talking to me in this stressful situation. But this is only my reality.
But I'm so very happy that I'm living in a society where I can freely say my opinion. And if Scientology would rule this society this would not be the case - this I know for sure.....

Thank you Gottabrain for starting this thread. It is a real good one.

Love
Markus

 

[Gottabrain]

deleted

 

[Gottabrain]

To Type 4: THANKS FOR THAT!!! I didn't know that and hadn't read the article all the way through.

Much appreciated.

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

I don't buy the studies because race is a socially constructed categorization. That is all it is, an arbitrary category of classification.

People excel when they are given oppurounities and options. If blacks and whites in America were in the opposite social position for the last 300 years I think the studies would have different conclusions.

Which brings up the subject of social studies (as in experiments). They are usually structured to prove or disprove an already established hypothesis. So the study itself is designed, structured, and performed to confirm or deny an already socially constructed hypothesis.

It is not ground breaking stuff. So the study is trying to resolve residual ambiguities of an already accepted theory. Therefore, the interpretation of the results are almost pre-determined by the structure of the study itself.

You might want to read "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Thomas S. Kuhn.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Regarding the racial studies:
It appears I was not clear enough and I apologize for that. No ONE PERSON has less of an ability than another, nor one race less than another. However, just as a child who is exposed to different languages can learn those languages more easily in later life due to developing the patterns in his brain at an early age, so it goes that "white anglos" have had hundreds of years learning "white anglo" sciences and therefore, if we stick with the mouse experiment, pick it up more easily.

But if we were to take, for example, a native South African's ability to deal with animals, hear animals, respond to animals, knowledge of his environment and what is dangerous, carried on through many generations, I am sure we will find the same principle holds. Stick a white anglo into that environment and try to teach him how to "sense" an elephant nearby, how to call call a bird, etc. and they may not pick it up very easily at all.

I only brought it up as an example that learning is faster and easier for people when there have been many generations of people repeatedly educated in the same information and sciences and to show that an ability to learn more quickly that which your predecessors have been taught can be carried in the DNA. And yes, the DNA, your code. It is a physical phenomenon, not a spiritual phenomenon and even predictable. My point is to show that there are other things than bad images that can be carried forward.

I make absolutely no statement whatsoever that any race is smarter, superior or better than any other. Only that education in the same line of thought carries forward in the following generations based on these studies.

IQ tests are faulty and flat. Aptitude tests help that, but in generally, testing brain capacity is a very incomplete science and the whole field of testing the ability to think, remember and retain information needs a great deal of improvement.

I think you may coming to a wrong conclusion. DNA carries physical traits and maybe potentialities. But languages and skills are socially constructed. Reading is something a person has to learn. Written language is not in a genetic code. It depends on the supportive factors in the person's enviroment whether or not he learns to read, not what his gradfather did to survive.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[Gottabrain]

But it is also a nature v. nurture thing.

 

[Gottabrain]

deleted

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Anabaptist I hear you and others. But you jumped to the wrong conclusion.

The point of the study IS that if the positions were reversed, blacks or any other race would have had the opportunity for the genetic codes to carry the prior learning and what you say is ABSOLUTELY TRUE - if they had all the generations of prior learning on those studies, they would excel at those studies and it would be the whites who would score lower at those studies. Now do you see what I mean?

Re. Aboriginals, yes, I think negative learning patterns can also be carried and if the good learning is true, so can the bad learning also be true. There is another study done by the University of Chicago about the "Culture of Poverty". That one is buried, but there's heaps of others easy to find on the net, here's one: http://orpc.iaccp.org/index.php?opt...80:ma-teresa-tuason&catid=26:chapter&Itemid=2

But it is also a nature v. nurture thing.

But I will bring up one thing about the Aboriginal native education that many Aussies are not aware of - have you ever seen an Aboriginal sing to an animal? WOW. I have seen some remarkable communication with animals by Aboriginals and I doubt very much any of us would pick it up very easily.

But I am saying that the genetic codes do not carry the prior learning of socailly constructed ideas. If this wasn't so then you wound't have to teach people to read, they would already know how to read if that ability was carried in a genetic code.
If you had many generations who learned how to read then maybe it would have an effect on the eyes, and that would be carried by the genetic code, but not the knowledge on how to read, or even the aptitude to read.

You are attirbuting to much range and potential to the genetic code. There is no evidence that it carries socially constructed norms. There is, however, a built in prejudice by the nature and structure and design of experiements to interpret the results that way.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[Type4_PTS]

Wow, most of the Cerebral Cortex brain cells last a lifetime.

There's been some fascinating research conducted at UCLA recently which showed that a single neuron could recognize a celebrity through pictures, text, or the sound of a name, but would ignore all others.

"Neuroscientists at UCLA discover single human neurons respond to specific celebrities, including Oprah Winfrey. They say these brain cells show it only takes a simple circuit of neurons to encode an idea, perception or memory."
http://www.bri.ucla.edu/bri_weekly/news_091009.asp

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Anabaptist, you are assuming that prior knowledge cannot be carried forward. That is the whole point - both those studies and many others support that it can and does - at least as far as the aptitude to learn something. The mice may not have "remembered" the prior maze, but yet they gained an aptitude to run it much, much faster. And that study has been repeated many times.

How would you explain the results?

The studies do not prove that, the assumtions just state so. There can be other causes.

If you look at the work being done with children (teenagers) whose eyesights are being through surgery you will find that these children do not have any aptitude for reading.

In fact, they are at a distinct development disadvantage. They can learn to read however. The view is it is much slower and difficult for them because their brains were not trained and not adapted at an early age. But they eventually do learn to read.

But there does not appear to be any evidence that aptitude to learn reading was already there (when it should have been if one assumes that is part of the genetic code).

I think you will see more and more studies which seem to lean in the direction that the effect of early education and training has a greater effect on the elasticity of the brain and aptitude than genetics.

If it was a matter of genetics then how could Frederick Douglass teach himself the alphabet and learn to read at an early age? His level of articulation is unsurpassed by most people.

You are attributing way too much to genetic codes than the evidence suggest.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[Gottabrain]

WOW! THANKS, 4!! (Can I call you by that nickname?

And thanks everyone else who is contributing to this. I don't want to monopolize the subject and address everyone separately because every single person has made an intelligent comment here.

Four, has just provided scientific evidence that MANY things are recorded and recognized by even tiny neurons but they coordinate to provide a central perception and they don't each recognize everything. Well done and thank you.

But then again, as Four pointed out, this stuff IS on a cellular level in the brain and HEART as anothe pointed out. (thank you.)

And that also brings us to another science or area, one that has stated that these are the central spirit centers of the body (brain, heart). But isn't there another centre?

Someone who knows, please fill me in. I am rusty on this, but aren't they called Chatrahs or something like that?

I like enlightenment and sharing and I am WIDE OPEN to all ideas here or criticisms. We all want to know the TRUTH, don't we?

 

[Gottabrain]

You know, I'm wondering - could the brain and heart cells then transfer this information - or at least a learning pattern - to the DNA?

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

These two paragraphs are from the article that Type 4 pointed out. I think this shows that the functions of the brain are clearly not exclusively a result of genetics.

"At its simplest, a neuron is a nerve cell, one of the myriads that make up our central nervous system. Each cell can send and receive the electro-chemical signals that charge our thoughts and emotions."

"On average, there are more neurons in the human brain than there are galaxies in the known universe -- about 100 billion in all, arranged on a scaffold of one trillion or so supporting, thread-like glial cells. Our inspirations race through thousands of miles of nerve fibers and axons so compacted that our entire neural network is no larger than a coconut. No two brains are alike, not even those of identical twins."

This research is at the stage where they are gathering data to support an accepted theory and paradigm, rather than attempting to resolve residual ambiguities of an already accepted theory. But one must still be cautious not to overextend its meaning or applications.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[Gottabrain]

deleted

 

[degraded being]

Regarding the racial studies:
It appears I was not clear enough and I apologize for that. No ONE PERSON has less of an ability than another, nor one race less than another. However, just as a child who is exposed to different languages can learn those languages more easily in later life due to developing the patterns in his brain at an early age, so it goes that "white anglos" have had hundreds of years learning "white anglo" sciences and therefore, if we stick with the mouse experiment, pick it up more easily.

But if we were to take, for example, a native South African's ability to deal with animals, hear animals, respond to animals, knowledge of his environment and what is dangerous, carried on through many generations, I am sure we will find the same principle holds. Stick a white anglo into that environment and try to teach him how to "sense" an elephant nearby, how to call call a bird, etc. and they may not pick it up very easily at all.

I only brought it up as an example that learning is faster and easier for people when there have been many generations of people repeatedly educated in the same information and sciences and to show that an ability to learn more quickly that which your predecessors have been taught can be carried in the DNA. And yes, the DNA, your code. It is a physical phenomenon, not a spiritual phenomenon and even predictable. My point is to show that there are other things than bad images that can be carried forward.

I make absolutely no statement whatsoever that any race is smarter, superior or better than any other. Only that education in the same line of thought carries forward in the following generations based on these studies.

IQ tests are faulty and flat. Aptitude tests help that, but in generally, testing brain capacity is a very incomplete science and the whole field of testing the ability to think, remember and retain information needs a great deal of improvement.

.you refer to white anglo sciences, but as far as I know many of those came from non-white non-anglos. It may seem like nit picking, but if the way you express your points appears to be feeding wrongly understood examples into the dialogue, you may spend a long long time on thrashing those out and little time on your main point.

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Anabaptist,

I don't think there is any argument here that children born with disabilities have trouble or that DNA is not the only role, perhaps not even a major role in a person's learning aptitude.

In group studies, there are always members that surpass the group, there are always members that are lower than the average as well. It just takes an average, that's all a group study does.

There is no question at all that many individuals have better or worse abilities or can rise above conditions. DNA doesn't dictate our lives!

Don't worry, hon, nobody is saying that. It is just an INFLUENCE.

I don't think that DNA is the all-encompassing datum that scientific literature has made it out to be for the last fifty years.

DNA has influence, as do many other things. But it hasn't panned out yet as a great breakthrough.

After fifty years, there is probably a reason for it. It simply is not the influention element that it is assumed to be.

But because it is so accepted, and research is predicated on that fact, few are looking elsewhere in other avenues for answers.

The theory, to me, is obviously flawed, because it has predicted remedies to problems which have not yet been remedied and don't appear to soon be.

When you seperate the speculation and conclusions based on earlier speculations you don't have the miraicle breakthrough that DNA was meant to be.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[MostlyLurker]

Thank you Gotabrain.
Interesting studies you have done.

...
Regarding the benefits of learning carrying on into later generations - I think we can accept that the idea that it is contained in the DNA is pure speculation (If not there then where? = false argument). The trace on a cell idea is no better. The only plausible idea to my mind is the continuance of theta from one body to the next. Whether through one "thetan" moving into a new body or whether there is one "group thetan" vitalising the whole group of mice is open to discussion.

That is my take too. If DNA was really the medium on which life experiences were recorded on, it would be ever changing or growing. Brain cells replicate in other brain cells. How they pass the accumulated knowledge to eggs and sperm DNA?

These two paragraphs are from the article that Type 4 pointed out. ....

"At its simplest, a neuron is a nerve cell, one of the myriads that make up our central nervous system. Each cell can send and receive the electro-chemical signals that charge our thoughts and emotions."
...

I believe the thetan by permeating the brain is able feel the chemical signals needed to feel the body and through the brain is able to generate the chemical signals needed control the body. The brain thus facilitates the thetan's communications to and from the body.

I am amazed at how complex and well organized a body is. I owe one but have no idea on it's maintenance beside high level activities like feeding it and keep it clean. No idea about low level activities like how to grow bones and fix wounds. I assume somebody is taking care of these things for me because things don't go right on their own without an intention (life) to do so. I dug into a biology textbook trying to understand Life from its basics and I have been unable to understand what life is. I learned some mechanics - how the DNA replicate, and so forth, but not what tells the cells how to survive, and why. Life is intention, intention is not MEST. Life can't be explained from a materialistic point of view. Not yet at least.