![Bravo Company BCM](/images/2016/banners/sticky/BCM_StickyBarAd_225x40.gif)
![Login](/images/2016/spacer.gif)
Cuttlefish are bizarre as hell too.
Someone needs to look at their documentation too. |
|
Quoted: No it doesn't. "However consistent with this conclusion are the recent RNA editing transcriptome-wide data on the somatic RNA diversification mechanisms in the behaviourally sophisticated Cephalopods such as Octopus. These data demonstrate extensive evolutionary conserved adenosine to inosine (A-to-I) mRNA editing sites in almost every single protein-coding gene in the behaviorally complex coleoid Cephalopods (Octopus in particular), but not in nautilus (Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). This enormous qualitative difference in Cephalopod protein recoding A-to-I mRNA editing compared to nautilus and other invertebrate and vertebrate animals is striking. Thus in transcriptome-wide screens only 13% of Drosophila and human protein coding mRNAs harbour an A-to-I recoding site; and there only about 25 human mRNA messages which contain a conserved A-to-I recoding site across mammals. In Drosophila lineages there are about 65 conserved A-sites in protein coding genes and only a few identified in C. elegans which support the hypothesis that A-to-I RNA editing recoding is mostly either neutral, detrimental, or rarely adaptive (reviewed in Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). Yet in Squid and particularly Octopus it is the norm, with almost every protein coding gene having an evolutionary conserved A-to-I mRNA editing site isoform, resulting in a nonsynonymous amino acid change (Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). This is a virtual qualitative jump in molecular genetic strategy in a supposed smooth and incremental evolutionary lineage - a type of sudden "great leap forward". Unless all the new genes expressed in the squid/octopus lineages arose from simple mutations of existing genes in either the squid or in other organisms sharing the same habitat, there is surely no way by which this large qualitative transition in A-to-I mRNA editing can be explained by conventional neo-Darwinian processes, even if horizontal gene transfer is allowed. One plausible explanation, in our view, is that the new genes are likely new extraterrestrial imports to Earth - most plausibly as an already coherent group of functioning genes within (say) cryopreserved and matrix protected fertilized Octopus eggs." View Quote When simplified to that argument, seems like a plausible proof of panspermia, or multiple abiogenesis. |
|
|
Quoted: No it doesn't. "However consistent with this conclusion are the recent RNA editing transcriptome-wide data on the somatic RNA diversification mechanisms in the behaviourally sophisticated Cephalopods such as Octopus. These data demonstrate extensive evolutionary conserved adenosine to inosine (A-to-I) mRNA editing sites in almost every single protein-coding gene in the behaviorally complex coleoid Cephalopods (Octopus in particular), but not in nautilus (Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). This enormous qualitative difference in Cephalopod protein recoding A-to-I mRNA editing compared to nautilus and other invertebrate and vertebrate animals is striking. Thus in transcriptome-wide screens only 13% of Drosophila and human protein coding mRNAs harbour an A-to-I recoding site; and there only about 25 human mRNA messages which contain a conserved A-to-I recoding site across mammals. In Drosophila lineages there are about 65 conserved A-sites in protein coding genes and only a few identified in C. elegans which support the hypothesis that A-to-I RNA editing recoding is mostly either neutral, detrimental, or rarely adaptive (reviewed in Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). Yet in Squid and particularly Octopus it is the norm, with almost every protein coding gene having an evolutionary conserved A-to-I mRNA editing site isoform, resulting in a nonsynonymous amino acid change (Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). This is a virtual qualitative jump in molecular genetic strategy in a supposed smooth and incremental evolutionary lineage - a type of sudden "great leap forward". Unless all the new genes expressed in the squid/octopus lineages arose from simple mutations of existing genes in either the squid or in other organisms sharing the same habitat, there is surely no way by which this large qualitative transition in A-to-I mRNA editing can be explained by conventional neo-Darwinian processes, even if horizontal gene transfer is allowed. One plausible explanation, in our view, is that the new genes are likely new extraterrestrial imports to Earth - most plausibly as an already coherent group of functioning genes within (say) cryopreserved and matrix protected fertilized Octopus eggs." View Quote where did you clip that from? |
|
Lol, that paper is from 2018 and was heavily criticized. It's a rehash of panspermia.
And yes, fringe papers get into real journals. Check out pubpeer or RetractionWatch. |
|
Quoted: That theory has been around for a while. I believe other papers were claiming something similar years ago. I don't believe it but there are a lot of fun ways to spin it into a movie plot. You could turn it into anything from Mars Attacks to Prometheus. View Quote There was a book series where this happened. First book is called Boundry By Eric Flint and Ryk E Spoor |
|
Quoted: Quoted: No it doesn't. "However consistent with this conclusion are the recent RNA editing transcriptome-wide data on the somatic RNA diversification mechanisms in the behaviourally sophisticated Cephalopods such as Octopus. These data demonstrate extensive evolutionary conserved adenosine to inosine (A-to-I) mRNA editing sites in almost every single protein-coding gene in the behaviorally complex coleoid Cephalopods (Octopus in particular), but not in nautilus (Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). This enormous qualitative difference in Cephalopod protein recoding A-to-I mRNA editing compared to nautilus and other invertebrate and vertebrate animals is striking. Thus in transcriptome-wide screens only 13% of Drosophila and human protein coding mRNAs harbour an A-to-I recoding site; and there only about 25 human mRNA messages which contain a conserved A-to-I recoding site across mammals. In Drosophila lineages there are about 65 conserved A-sites in protein coding genes and only a few identified in C. elegans which support the hypothesis that A-to-I RNA editing recoding is mostly either neutral, detrimental, or rarely adaptive (reviewed in Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). Yet in Squid and particularly Octopus it is the norm, with almost every protein coding gene having an evolutionary conserved A-to-I mRNA editing site isoform, resulting in a nonsynonymous amino acid change (Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). This is a virtual qualitative jump in molecular genetic strategy in a supposed smooth and incremental evolutionary lineage - a type of sudden "great leap forward". Unless all the new genes expressed in the squid/octopus lineages arose from simple mutations of existing genes in either the squid or in other organisms sharing the same habitat, there is surely no way by which this large qualitative transition in A-to-I mRNA editing can be explained by conventional neo-Darwinian processes, even if horizontal gene transfer is allowed. One plausible explanation, in our view, is that the new genes are likely new extraterrestrial imports to Earth - most plausibly as an already coherent group of functioning genes within (say) cryopreserved and matrix protected fertilized Octopus eggs." where did you clip that from? |
|
|
remember that time when GD forgot about squid, cuttlefish, nautilus, and other similar creatures because the media published a click bait story on octopus?
i member |
|
So when the alien race they came from arrives, we are screwed over how we have treated their progeny?
|
|
|
|
Quoted: The only sane thing from the article: Keith Baverstock, a medical researcher with the University of Eastern Finland, reviewed the paper. In his review, Baverstock stated that there is indeed a lot of evidence that makes the thesis plausible. However, he said that this isn’t how science advances. Because so much of the evidence is not definitive, this thesis only adds to the mystery surrounding the origin of life. In fact, nothing in the paper’s summary really helps us better understand the history of life on our planet. It only adds more conjectures to the already overflowing pot of theories that science has birthed over the years. Sounds about right. It’s an interesting theory, and it makes some sense, but there’s nothing definitive, making it nothing more than a theory. |
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: No it doesn't. "However consistent with this conclusion are the recent RNA editing transcriptome-wide data on the somatic RNA diversification mechanisms in the behaviourally sophisticated Cephalopods such as Octopus. These data demonstrate extensive evolutionary conserved adenosine to inosine (A-to-I) mRNA editing sites in almost every single protein-coding gene in the behaviorally complex coleoid Cephalopods (Octopus in particular), but not in nautilus (Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). This enormous qualitative difference in Cephalopod protein recoding A-to-I mRNA editing compared to nautilus and other invertebrate and vertebrate animals is striking. Thus in transcriptome-wide screens only 13% of Drosophila and human protein coding mRNAs harbour an A-to-I recoding site; and there only about 25 human mRNA messages which contain a conserved A-to-I recoding site across mammals. In Drosophila lineages there are about 65 conserved A-sites in protein coding genes and only a few identified in C. elegans which support the hypothesis that A-to-I RNA editing recoding is mostly either neutral, detrimental, or rarely adaptive (reviewed in Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). Yet in Squid and particularly Octopus it is the norm, with almost every protein coding gene having an evolutionary conserved A-to-I mRNA editing site isoform, resulting in a nonsynonymous amino acid change (Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). This is a virtual qualitative jump in molecular genetic strategy in a supposed smooth and incremental evolutionary lineage - a type of sudden "great leap forward". Unless all the new genes expressed in the squid/octopus lineages arose from simple mutations of existing genes in either the squid or in other organisms sharing the same habitat, there is surely no way by which this large qualitative transition in A-to-I mRNA editing can be explained by conventional neo-Darwinian processes, even if horizontal gene transfer is allowed. One plausible explanation, in our view, is that the new genes are likely new extraterrestrial imports to Earth - most plausibly as an already coherent group of functioning genes within (say) cryopreserved and matrix protected fertilized Octopus eggs." where did you clip that from? Should’ve been posted in OP so you could look without the media bias. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079610718300798 |
|
|
I wonder if experiments have been conducted to see how octopuses can live in zero g. Likewise, I don't know shit about them - they they need 100% humidity, or do they require to be submerged to live. Google, about 30 minutes out of water. Given the mass of water vs air - don't see them space faring any day soon.
|
|
|
well from out very limited understand of what "life" looks like it is highly likely that any life form we have not yet discovered either looks very much like we'd expect (carbon based, energy consuming) or really weird to us, like silicon, arsenic, or even energy based life. this begs the question, could we currently be observing life in different forms and not even realize it's life. yes, yes we could.
|
|
|
|
Quoted: And if they were that smart, they would have packed their shit and left Earth by now. ![]() ![]() View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes |
|
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: No it doesn't. "However consistent with this conclusion are the recent RNA editing transcriptome-wide data on the somatic RNA diversification mechanisms in the behaviourally sophisticated Cephalopods such as Octopus. These data demonstrate extensive evolutionary conserved adenosine to inosine (A-to-I) mRNA editing sites in almost every single protein-coding gene in the behaviorally complex coleoid Cephalopods (Octopus in particular), but not in nautilus (Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). This enormous qualitative difference in Cephalopod protein recoding A-to-I mRNA editing compared to nautilus and other invertebrate and vertebrate animals is striking. Thus in transcriptome-wide screens only 13% of Drosophila and human protein coding mRNAs harbour an A-to-I recoding site; and there only about 25 human mRNA messages which contain a conserved A-to-I recoding site across mammals. In Drosophila lineages there are about 65 conserved A-sites in protein coding genes and only a few identified in C. elegans which support the hypothesis that A-to-I RNA editing recoding is mostly either neutral, detrimental, or rarely adaptive (reviewed in Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). Yet in Squid and particularly Octopus it is the norm, with almost every protein coding gene having an evolutionary conserved A-to-I mRNA editing site isoform, resulting in a nonsynonymous amino acid change (Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). This is a virtual qualitative jump in molecular genetic strategy in a supposed smooth and incremental evolutionary lineage - a type of sudden "great leap forward". Unless all the new genes expressed in the squid/octopus lineages arose from simple mutations of existing genes in either the squid or in other organisms sharing the same habitat, there is surely no way by which this large qualitative transition in A-to-I mRNA editing can be explained by conventional neo-Darwinian processes, even if horizontal gene transfer is allowed. One plausible explanation, in our view, is that the new genes are likely new extraterrestrial imports to Earth - most plausibly as an already coherent group of functioning genes within (say) cryopreserved and matrix protected fertilized Octopus eggs." im tarded...TL:DR He says it don't, but then you read it, and it do. Cuttlefish too, it's a small group of creatures that have a bunch of DNA we don't see elsewhere. They also have a lot of DNA we do see elsewhere though, so it's more likely a virus or other simple lifeform from an alien environment with complex life in it that survived relocation here, or there's a whole branch of terrestrial biology that's completely undiscovered that got pruned down to a few, or even one, species. Whatever the explanation is, it's going to be interesting. |
|
|
Cephalopods are certainly among the most alien looking of species, but methinks they're as terrestrial as the rest of us.
And if life on Earth is that diverse*, imagine what form actual alien life might take. *but not woke! |
|
It makes sense, what with all the butt stuff you hear about from abductees.
|
|
Twilight zone episode talked about this.
That they are far smarter than we are. ![]() The Twilight Zone Season 2: "8" Season 2 Episode 6 Breakdown & Easter Eggs! |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.