Since 1977 when split genes were discovered, much has been written about why introns and junk DNA exist. There have been countless theories all taking a stab at this perplexing genetic phenomenon. Like the relationship and relevance between introns and exons; various selection mechanisms; selected gene reproduction; adaptive genes with a ‘fitness’ advantage; constructional selection and constructional advantage; the ‘nature-nurture’ controversy; low and high pleiotropy; genotype-phenotype relationship; evolution of proteins; the effect of original ‘proto-genes’; critical and non-critical regions; selfish DNA; competition between DNA sequences; new genes evolving and being added to the genome; useful genes; exon shuffling; high and low modularity; folding genes and their effects; competition between exons; random intron insertion; and many more complex and even simple issues. Insane stuff, isn’t it?
What strikes me is that seemingly all these philosophies have approached the subject from the perspective that introns and junk DNA are just a waste of space on the genome, whose only possible function is that of their relevance of position. They may play a role in DNA division, but because all the introns are discarded by mRNA (messenger RNA) before it duplicates the split DNA strand, introns are actually perceived as an unnecessary waste of space, and a disposable by-product which just happens to be present in our genome. But since all human DNA is 99.9% identical, why is this wasted space still present in our DNA, and how could DNA have evolved into this form when evolution favours the dominant gene? Scientists should shake their own personal dogma about wisdom derived from archaeological discoveries and pay more serious attention to the idea that we may have been created some 200,000 years ago in the image of our maker. The makeup of our DNA has a great deal to do with that specific incident.
There does not have to be a conflict between evolution and creation. But most scientists are so blinded by the evolutionist doctrine, that they bluntly refuse to take seriously the relatively new Sumerian translations of the creation of the ‘Adamu’. If we can just get our heads around this ‘incredible fairytale’ from our distant past, we may just be able to tie up the various loose ends that don’t seem to add up. Chromosomal Adam and mitochondrial Eve have both been dated back to the same time around 200,000 years ago. We all share the same genome with all this wasted space on it, and according to our ‘Adam and Eve’, we have all had it since the point of creation. These are critical clues, which lead me to reach only one logical conclusion. The genome was meant to be the length it is, which happens to be the same length of that of our maker, our genetic donor. The genes have however been tampered with, resulting in the removal or shutting down of most of them (97%), leaving behind an unintelligent, primitive and subservient creature. But many of the undesirable genes of this maker remained behind in the newly created DNA. If we can get our heads around this, it must mean that much of our anatomy and character is inherited from our maker. Let us not forget the very important words which many of us live by, that we were created ‘in the image of our maker’.
If this is the case, then we need to ask, who was our maker(s)? How evolved were they? How smart were they really? How much of their genome did they use compared to ours? Because according to my theory, if they had the perfect complete genome, they certainly did not behave accordingly. They certainly created a big mess on this planet, leaving their offspring to survive and fend for themselves in the kindergarten of the universal community of beings. Is this the way we will behave when we start to colonise Mars?
CHAPTER 6
Panspermia
I have often wondered why so many depictions of aliens from space carry such resemblance to us humans. All those who claim to have been abducted, or those who have been contacted by aliens, mostly describe them in very similar fashion. The strange thing is that these aliens seem to have features similar to humans and not some other insect-like monster from space. Is it because the individual who claims to have seen these aliens may simply be hallucinating or projecting our own image onto them? Or could it be the influence of mass media and the many movies that have graced our screens depicting aliens mostly in a humanoid form? Or could there possibly be a more logical or possibly even scientific explanation for this curious phenomenon? Since we have come to know that the Earth is not the centre of the universe, and that the universe is quite possibly endless, we can start opening our minds to new possibilities. But like many things we ‘seem’ to have discovered in the last two centuries on Earth, we find out that they have already been discovered by our distant ancestors. It is especially true for the subject of astronomy. The ancient Mesopotamians, Egyptians, Greeks, Chinese and Americans, all had a superior knowledge of the cosmos compared to us today. They knew things about the planets and our solar system that we in the so-called western world only rediscovered in the latter parts of the 20th century.
One such cosmic phenomenon which was reintroduced into modern cosmology in the 1970s was the ancient Greek concept of Panspermia. This word can be translated as ‘seeds everywhere’ and its first recorded advocate was a Greek philosopher known as Anaxagoras of Clazomenae in Asia Minor, born about 500 BC. He was from a noble family, but wishing to devote himself entirely to science, he gave up his property to his relatives and relocated to Athens, where he lived in intimacy with Pericles. Shortly before the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War he was charged with impiety, which was, ‘denying the gods recognised by the State’. He not only had the honour of giving philosophy a home in Athens, where it flourished for a thousand years, but he was the first philosopher who introduced a spiritual principle which gives matter life and form. Anaxagoras laid down his doctrine in a prose work entitled On Nature of which only fragments are preserved. Anaxagoras postulated the idea of independent elements which coexist in space and air, creating life. He called them ‘seeds’. They are the ultimate elements of combination and are indivisible, imperishable ‘primordia’ of infinite number, and differing in shape, colour, and taste. Later writers referred to these seeds as ‘omoiomereia’ which was an expression of Aristotle, meaning “particles of like kind with each other and with the whole that is made up of them”.
It is fascinating how the ancient ‘gods’ seem to make their appearance in the strangest places at the strangest times. Here we are trying to unravel the origins of a completely different subject, and yet we find that our protagonist Anaxagoras’ life was greatly influenced by the ancient gods because he ‘denied the gods who were recognised by the state’. It is very clear that these ancient gods must have had a firm hold on the Greek authorities. The fact that a philosopher was jailed because he disobeyed the gods, goes a long way in supporting the outlandish theory that these gods must have had a real hold over the ancient kings. And as we will find out, their control was absolute.
When Panspermia was reintroduced in the '70s by a handful of serious scientists, it was met with loads of criticism and the kind of ridicule which has been experienced by most visionaries throughout human history. Somehow Aristotle got in on the act some 2,400 years ago with his theory of ‘spontaneous generation’, which had become the preferred philosophy until recent times. It was however grossly abused and misused by creationists ever since to support their narrow-minded religious beliefs, which portray a romantic picture of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden.
But then in 1864, Louis Pasteur shocked the scientific world with his landmark experiment, disproving the concept of spontaneous generation. This discovery also had a practical impact on medicine, proving that germs are the primary causes and carriers of disease. In a simple experiment using a sterilised flask, he showed that a culture can grow in the flask only if germs enter it, and that plain air cannot initiate the growth of micro-organisms. “There is no known circumstance in which it can be confirmed that microscopic beings came into the world without germs, without parents similar to themselves.” (Louis Pasteur, 1864.). He clearly demonstrated that life comes only from life. If this principle had been accepted as the fundamental theory on the origins of l
ife then, today we may still be unsure how life on Earth began, but at least we would approach the question differently. We would assume that life here had to be seeded somehow and we would investigate the possible mechanisms for such seeding. Is it possible for bacteria and other microscopic organisms to come to Earth from space? Can they survive harsh conditions, radiation, extreme temperatures for long periods of time? Maybe even millions of years?
Since Mr. Pasteur made his discovery, many scientists have supported his findings with their own voices and their own experiments. But the real twist came in the '70s when British astronomers Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe rekindled international interest in Panspermia. While their statements were quickly dismissed by the majority of the scientific world as an old-fashioned philosophy, their experimental evidence could not be ignored. But as time passed and these renewed theories attracted more interest from a growing field of scholars, the evidence presented became overwhelming. Suddenly, Panspermia attracted a new, more appropriate name in the form of ‘Cosmic Ancestry’. But to prove this Cosmic Ancestry theory required some solid proof and evidence. After all, scientists all say they work with evidence… don’t they? This is really the fundamental difference between them and theologians… or is it? It seems to me that as time passes by, the tenets of science are firmly rooted in the speculative and the possible, more often than in the proven. Even in the face of irrefutable evidence there is always an element of error that may have crept in. This is the stuff of science. Always has been and probably always will be, at least until we attain that perfect genome status, which will hopefully elevate us beyond the need to know the physical, while putting us firmly in touch with the spiritual.
So, to argue the possibility of life arriving on Earth from space requires some proof of life in space… and if it does exist, how does it reach Earth… and once it has reached Earth, what kind of role can it possibly play in the creation of life, evolution or the speeding up of evolution? This is what Hoyle and Wickramasinghe proved in the early '70s. By using spectroscopic analyses of light from distant stars, they showed that there was evidence of life in the interstellar dust. This dust exists throughout space as leftover matter from the creation of stellar systems and contains microscopic organisms like bacteria. It is also possible that there may be viruses and other organic material present in this so-called dust. It got there as a result of cosmic collisions of space bodies like planets and even supernovas, which occur when a star explodes spreading its content over vast distances of space. By definition this really means that the universe must be filled with life of all kinds. Given its size and age, there have been cosmic collisions occurring for billions of years. The additional fact that the universe is growing at the speed of light, creating unimaginable numbers of stars and planets, creating more matter that can collide in space, spreading more living organisms throughout space, every millisecond of Earth-time. Now that we have the evidence, the next step is to convince the world that such life could actually reach our planet, or any other planet. Obviously these organisms will only survive and flourish on planets with conditions favourable for their growth. So how does this dust filled with life reach our planet and other planets?
We will discuss the presence of asteroids and comets in space. Comets are probably the most fascinating objects in the universe. I say universe, because the assumption is that if they exist in our solar system they will most likely exist in others. The more we study comets, the more they take us by surprise and every year reveals amazing new facts. The latest estimates are that all the comets in our solar system actually outweigh the total mass of the planets. If this is true, and much of the evidence about their ability to distribute living organisms throughout space is also true, it certainly turns comets into the primary distributors of life in the universe.
Comets are thought to be leftover matter from the creation of solar systems and have been described as giant ‘dirty’ snowballs on some kind of orbit around the sun. These orbits are very erratic and can vary from a few years to many thousands of years. Asteroids, on the other hand, are thought to be leftover pieces of planets or moons due to cosmic collisions. There is still a lot of debate about the difference between the two. It is possible that asteroids are just the remains of old comets whose ice and dirt have been burnt off and evaporated over thousands of years of travelling in space – either by getting too close to the sun or too close to other large bodies which radiate heat; or even the constant radiation of distant stars and solar winds. As comets and asteroids fly through space they pick up bacterial life from the interstellar dust, which gets embedded in the ice and rock. The ice in comets covers and protects the microscopic organisms on their journey through space. The comet becomes the carrier for the living organism and together they can journey for longer than humanity has been on Earth. The latest findings are that microscopic life can survive indefinitely under the right conditions. This means that once the 'living space dust' is embedded in the comet, it can survive for as long as it takes to be deposited on some hospitable planet.
The tail behind the comet is quite spectacular and can stretch for millions of kilometres. It consists of gas and dust which is discharged from the coma (nucleus head) and will contain many of these microscopic living particles. Thousands if not millions of comets have come into close proximity to Earth, leaving behind billions of miles of living space debris from their tails. These comets cross the paths of many planets, leaving behind the living debris waiting to pounce on an unsuspecting cosmic body. When the comets are close to the sun their activity increases and they discharge as much as one million tons of gas and living dust into space every day. As the planets orbit the sun they will inevitably travel through this living debris, which get trapped by the gravitational pull of the planet.
But how many of these comets can there possibly be? Millions may have passed close to the sun in the past, but would the solar winds not drive their space dust away, into deep space? This is where that amazing human nature resurfaces, to remind us of how suspicious we are of each other and how obsessed we are with conflict. In the '60s when space activity increased around the Apollo moon landings, US intelligence photographed many explosions in the outer limits of the atmosphere, while on the lookout for enemy missiles. They were obviously waiting for an attack from the Soviets and therefore these cosmic events must have really given them a scare. But luckily they soon realised that it was not the enemy, but comets and other space objects between 30 and 50 metres in diameter, which were exploding when entering the upper atmosphere. This information was apparently kept classified until 1994 and the realisation of what was actually happening possibly prevented a full scale nuclear war.
It seems that US intelligence has lightened up a little since the fall of the
the USSR, because on the 28 of May 1997, NASA announced the incredible news that thousands of comets “as large as houses”, enter Earth’s atmosphere every day. They actually break up and are destroyed at between 1,000 and 20,000 kilometres above Earth. The principal investigator for NASA’s polar spacecraft instruments, Dr. Lewis A. Frank, described their descent as a “relatively gentle cosmic rain”. This information also feeds the theory that all the water on Earth actually also arrived from space.
The miraculous thing about comets, is that because they are made up mainly of ice, organic compounds trapped inside, such as bacteria, viruses and even larvae, can remain in suspended animation for thousands of years. In fact, it is now believed that bacteria, spores and viruses can survive in comets forever, until they are either destroyed or deposited in a life-friendly environment. There have been many scientists who vigorously supported the distribution of life from space, before Hoyle and Wickramasinghe reintroduced it to the world. Sir Isaac Newton was just one of them. He was convinced that the continued arrival of cometary material on Earth was essential for life on this planet. Since then it has been calculated that roughly 1,000 tons of cometary debris enters the Earth’s atmosphere annually.
But comets and asteroids either crash into us, or they explode in the atmosphere, or they burn up in the atmosphere. Remember that these cosmic bodies are travelling in space at incredible speeds of between 10 km per second to as much as 100 km per second. But because there is no friction, the speed is not a factor. It does however become a factor when these objects get sucked towards a planet and enter its atmosphere. The friction in the atmosphere starts to slow the objects down, heating them up in the process. This has been one of the major hurdles NASA had to deal with, to protect the space shuttles against burning up on re-entry from space. We saw the tragic accident when some of the protective tiles were dislodged and the shuttle Columbia disintegrated because of the intense heat which resulted, while on its way back to Earth from the International Space Station.
So now we know that there are constant minor cosmic collisions in which Earth is involved and we have witnessed some spectacular collisions between near-neighbour Jupiter and a giant comet in 1994. We recognise that the planets and moons bear the crater scars of giant collisions from the distant past and the asteroid belt looks like it could be the leftover matter from a planet that was destroyed in a cosmic collision. Is it not possible that at some stage in the distant past Earth was also involved in a cosmic collision? The kind of collision, which could be responsible for the strange phenomenon that all the land on Earth at the beginning of Earth-time, was concentrated together on one side of the planet, while the other had a gaping hole filled with water? A collision of this kind between Earth and another planet would have resulted in the contamination and sharing of the seeds of life between the two planets. As they moved apart, the one settled in an orbit around the sun where Earth is at present, while the other planet was spun into an orbit that took it into deep space, very similar to the orbits of many comets. As these planets evolved and life on them evolved, they would have shared many similar species of animals and plants originating from the shared seeds of life, transferred between them during their collision. Should we be surprised to find similar kinds of animal species and plant species on both planets? It seems highly feasible that given their shared seeds of life, they should be evolving along similar paths. As the larger of the planets round the sun every couple of thousand years and their humanoid inhabitants come to Earth to observe the activity on such a beautiful planet, should we be surprised that the so-called ‘aliens’ we encounter share many human-like features with us? We will revisit this topic later as we unravel the Sumerian scriptures.
Slave Species of god Page 9
