re: 8 yr old girl solves murder of heart transplant donor via memory transference

quote:

---

In a type of symbiotic relationship where two different beings are housed in one organism....

---

I think that’s a pretty long reach. Mitochondria and the cells in which they reside are no longer symbiotes. The former has evolved into an organelle of the latter.

That that evolution has given the mitochondrion organelle responsibilities beyond energy production should not be surprising. It was, after all, once a fully independent organism.

quote:

---

Leaving functions such as deciding what cells will be maintain, replicated, and which die off to the collective mitochondria.

---

Mitochondria do not have a collective function. Rather, the “decision” to trigger cell death is made in each cell alone. That decision is based upon the mitochondrion’s communication with the cell’s nucleus.

There is no mystery behind the functions of DNA, mitochondrial or cellular. They are physical programs that act together in regulating each cell’s function.

Probably, however he's still not taken all the fun out such an already fake thread. . .

quote:

---

Evolutionary Origin of Mitochondria

Unlike any other organelle, except for chloroplasts, mitochondria appear to originate only from other mitochondria. They contain their own DNA, which is circular as is true with bacteria, along with their own transcriptional and translational machinery. Mitochondrial ribosomes and transfer RNA molecules are similar to those of bacteria, as are components of their membrane.These and related observations led Dr. Lynn Margulis, in the 1970s, to propose an extracellular origin for mitochondria.

Some species of present day protists contain living organisms within their cytoplasm. For example, Paramecium bursaria are hosts for zoochlorellae, photosynthetic protists, that reside within the cytoplasm. The relationship appears to be symbiotic. The endosymbiont gains protection and possibly some essential nutrients from the host cytoplasm. The host has a readily available food source when its usual food source is depleted. If you have the opportunity to observe P. bursaria, note that the endosymbionts are not incorporated into food vacuoles. They are residents within the cytoplasm itself, and either are descended from organisms that survived endocytosis or have some mechanism for escaping food vacuoles once they are ingested.

Protists are eukaryotes, of course, meaning that their genetic material is organized into a compartment, the nucleus, that is surrounded by membrane, and that they have membrane-delineated organelles. In the warm seas of the ancient earth, the first living things would have been prokaryotes. The endosymbiotic hypothesis for the origin of mitochondria (and chloroplasts) suggests that mitochondria are descended from specialized bacteria (probably purple nonsulfur bacteria) that somehow survived endocytosis by another species of prokaryote or some other cell type, and became incorporated into the cytoplasm. The ability of symbiont bacteria to conduct cellular respiration in host cells that relied on glycosis and fermentation would have provided a considerable evolutionary advantage. Similarly, host cells with symbiont bacteria capable of photosynthesis would also have an advantage. In both cases, the number of environments in which the cells could survive would have been greatly expanded.

Mitochondria do not contain anywhere near the amount of DNA needed to code for all mitochondria-specific proteins, however, a billion or so years of evolution could account for a progressive loss of independence. The endosymbiotic hypothesis might be called a theory, but experimental evidence can't be provided to test it. Only circumstantial evidence is available in support of the proposal, which is the most likely explanation for the origin of mitochondria. The evidence needed to change the model from hypothesis to theory is likely forever lost in antiquity.

---

Let me guess, the murderer was Bret Kavanaugh.

quote:

---

nothing is more fun that fake science

---

It’s bewildering that so many humans readily subscribe to unscientific hypotheses. CBD oil, psychics, cryptids, UFOs, out-of-body experiences and, of course the big one, religion and its host of supernatural beings are some well-known examples. There are many others. All of these exist only in the brains of believers but they are so strong and commonplace that they rule many societies and disrupt the natural progression of humanity as a sentient species.

This thread concerns one of the latest attempts to “prove” a hypothesis that has no basis in scientific research. Memory, the soul and mentality seem to be regarded as some supernatural powers and there is a great desire to add credibility to them by throwing wild theories about. None of them ever make it past scientific scrutiny, of course, but that doesn’t deter their ardent supporters who scream bias by the scientific community.

It’s hard for reductionists like myself to watch people waste their time with these baseless claims but it’s entertaining at the same time. I think the solution is to reduce the population to the level that all humans can be given the tools to evaluate reality from a scientific standpoint.

Science is only a useful tool for propogating and advancing the human specifies. Your conclusion is that the population should be sacrificed in order to promote more scientific evaluation. Science for science sake.

Science is your religion and your God, you just mask it with ego and intellectual language.

quote:

---

Yawn, such a trite statement. Science is knowledge about nature; it’s readily available for anyone to study. Religion is all about the supernatural, which doesn’t exist except in people’s brains.

---

Rather science is the quest for an explanation for what GOD did.

Religion is the collection of biases that men often use against each other.

Wait, what’s wrong with CBD?

That’s simply not true. The article you cited goes into depth about the benefits of CBD. If your issue is with the CBD oil that’s sold on the side of the road, I’m with you. Cannabidiol, however, has legitimate medicinal properties.

That’s true, but research has still been done and is currently being done. As a researcher, you have to jump through certain hoops in order to acquire whatever substance but it’s possible. I know people that do psilocybin studies in the US, for example.

All that to say, CBD has been shown to be an effective anti-inflammatory, mild anxiolytic, and anti-seizure medication.