Re: Logic/ stemcells

From: Kenneth Van Oost (
Date: Sat Aug 11 2001 - 16:28:15 BST

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: Sheldrake and Goodwin info"

    Received: by id JAA20921 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 09:36:30 +0100
    Message-ID: <005f01c1227a$53b1cbc0$7d9cbed4@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <>
    To: "memetics" <>
    Subject: Re: Logic/ stemcells
    Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 17:28:15 +0200
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
    X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
    Precedence: bulk

    > Hi all,
    > Something to help Dace in order to keep his cool,
    > > Genes do not appear to contain instructions for the folding of proteins.
    > > The very concept of "genetic instruction" is speculative. There is, as
    > yet,
    > > no evidence to bolster it. Nucleic acid chains produce amino acid
    > << What about the search into ' stemcells' !?
    > Bush did give his fiat to do tests with these cells in order to fight
    > desease.
    > Like Dace said, we do not yet know how cells fold up in the way they do
    > and why they do it that way, despite the efforts of list members to prove
    > otherwise. We do not yet known what makes a key a key and what
    > makes a lock a lock.
    > Saying it otherwise seems to indicate 2 things, one, the persons involved
    > saying they know, knows about evidence where noone seems to know
    > about and two, or that the persons involved themselves lack the knowledge
    > and hypothise.
    > Making up conclusions about things which are not yet explained in detail,
    > (there was not even granted permission to use such cells ( not in all
    > countries)
    > for investigations) is IMO trying to get the other(s) give up their search
    > in what seems to me a good model to grasp memetics in its full.
    > Giving now the opportunity to search why and how cells fold up in the
    > way they do is IMO very important for memetics, not in the least to me
    > personally.
    > In a sense we gonna finally be able to determine if memes are involved
    > in the making of genes or not.
    > If 1_ memes are functions of genes or 2_ if memes are inheritable by
    > offspring or not will be determined there, once and for all.
    > And in a way, the future of memetics hangs in the balance with what
    > scientists come up with.
    > If stemcells are basicly ' virginal ' and they are able to grow in the 40
    > weeks of pregnancy in about 200 cellspieces which combined together
    > make up one baby ( braincells/ bloodcells/ skincells etc) well one, we
    > will be surprised and two we will be able to see if all our theories will
    > fold up correctly.
    > But we are a long way from setting up cultures of cells in labo 's in
    > order to breed cells which will make up our brain or muscle tissue !!
    > Best regards,
    > Kenneth
    > ( I am, because we are) one more step closer

    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 13 2001 - 10:20:47 BST