Kalexander2

Still, where do they match?

@Chevdove: It's perfectly okay if you were religious, I learn the seriousness of right wrong by both the rod and the Bible. As I alluded to before, your efforts are admirable and noble. Your frustration seems to be getting the best of you though. We live in a world that has no pity for the downtrodden, nor mercy for the weak, especially if you're Black. The oppression we experience is often done with lies and deliberate misguidance through biblical scriptures. Unfortunately, you'll have to physically fight Black folk if you try to wake them up to that fact. Fact is, passages from the Bible may soon prove to be useless when you hit the heart of your research project. Be prepared for hurt and disappointment. In case you may not have noticed, I'm a pessimist with no faith in mankind, Black, nor especially white folk. Yeah, like I said, if you have an idea about something on your mind, pursue it with vigor. But be honest with yourself first; whether it's worth your while and/or capable of changing how you feel.

It seems to me that what you're trying to do is illuminate social disparities in the world that religion ought to take a closer look at and prove it by showing how people use scripture, or miss the real messages.

You're welcome. Though your research hasn't backed up anything. But now you, at least, have a thesis statement to guide your research. Good luck!

@Chevdove: What is the point, exactly? A reference? If so thanks for sharing. Or, a theory that science proves something in the Bible if so, you've failed to show it, still. No, they do not have the same conclusions. There's the Gnome Project right above where is it concluded that 'original sin, blue eyes' is in the Bible? Okay, why would offer a reference, what's the reason, to show us scientific facts, stories from the Bible, or what? OR, are you trying to prove a point, namely, that "According to the Genome Project, the Bible proves that's original sin, satanism, white supremacy which affects all people is a scientific fact." Even the Bible doesn't prove that!

Right, your theory is "According to the Genome Project, the Bible proves that's original sin, satanism, white supremacy which affects all people is a scientific fact? Is that the thesis statement you're offering?" The Genome Project does not prove original sin nor anything in the Bible. The Bible did not predict 'blue eyes' nor does science prove God made Blue eyes. "6000 years ago' what? Blue eyes or what?

Science and theology do tend to be at odds, nothing anywhere can authenticate the validity of the Bible. Science validates theories through observation and experimenting with real tangible stuff. You can read the Bible, accept or reject it but you can't prove anything in it. Likewise, science can't prove anything in the Bible and does not require the Bible to prove anything.

Okay, you want me to prove your theory even though I disagree, OKAY. Below is excepts for the project report, I've even highlighted some possible connections to the Bible but I fail to see how they support your thesis statement. What did I miss? The Genome Project-Write Jef D. Boeke*, George Church*, Andrew Hessel*, Nancy J. Kelley*, Adam Arkin, Yizhi Cai, Rob Carlson, Aravinda Chakravarti, Virginia W. Cornish, Liam Holt, Farren J. Isaacs, Todd Kuiken, Marc Lajoie, Tracy Lessor, Jeantine Lunshof, Matthew T. Maurano, Leslie A. Mitchell, Jasper Rine, Susan Rosser, Neville E. Sanjana, Pamela A. Silver, David Valle, Harris Wang, Jeffrey C. Way, Luhan Yang See all authors and affiliations Science 08 Jul 2016: Vol. 353, Issue 6295, pp. 126-127 DOI: 10.1126/science.aaf6850 The Human Genome Project (“HGP-read”), nominally completed in 2004, aimed to sequence the human genome and to improve the technology, cost, and quality of DNA sequencing (1, 2). It was biology's first genome-scale project and at the time was considered controversial by some. Now, it is recognized as one of the great feats of exploration, one that has revolutionized science and medicine. Although sequencing, analyzing, and editing DNA continue to advance at a breakneck pace, the capability for constructing DNA sequences in cells is mostly limited to a small number of short segments, which restricts the ability to manipulate and understand biological systems. Further understanding of genetic blueprints could come from construction of large, gigabase (Gb)-sized animal and plant genomes, including the human genome, which would, in turn, drive development of tools and methods to facilitate large-scale synthesis and editing of genomes. To this end, we propose the Human Genome Project-Write (HGP-write), named to honor HGP-read but embracing synthesis of all large genomes. Responsible Innovation Genome synthesis is a logical extension of the genetic engineering tools that have been used safely within the biotech industry for ∼40 years and have provided important societal benefits. However, recent technological advancements—e.g., standardized gene parts, whole-genome synthesis, and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-Cas9 genome editing technology (3, 4)—are revolutionizing the field (5). Some applications are controversial; human germline editing in particular has raised intense moral debate (6). As human genome-scale synthesis appears increasingly feasible, a coordinated scientific effort to understand, discuss, and apply large-genome engineering technologies is timely. HGP-write will require public involvement and consideration of ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) from the start. Responsible innovation requires more than ELSI, though, and involves identifying common goals important to scientists and the wider public through timely and detailed consultation among diverse stakeholders. We will enable broad public discourse on HGP-write; having such conversations well in advance of project implementation will guide emerging capabilities in science and contribute to societal decision-making. Through open and ongoing dialogue, common goals can be identified. Informed consent must take local and regional values into account and enable true decision-making on particularly sensitive use of cells and DNA from certain sources. Finally, the highest biosafety standards should guide project work and safety for lab workers and research participants, and ecosystems should pervade the design process. A priority will be cost reduction of both genome engineering and testing tools to aid in equitable distribution of benefits—e.g., enabling research on crop plants and infectious agents and vectors in developing nations. To ensure responsible innovation and ongoing consideration of ELSI, a percentage of all research funds could be dedicated to these issues, enabling inclusive decision-making on the topics mentioned above (7). In addition, there should be equitable distribution of any early and future benefits in view of diverse and pressing needs in different global regions. The broad scope and novelty of the project call for consideration of appropriate regulation alongside development of the science and societal debates. National and international laws and regulations differ, and as in stem cell research, a major burden of responsibility for setting standards rests with the scientists and their community. Existing stem cell research guidelines (8) may serve as a useful template. From Observation to Action The primary goal of HGP-write is to reduce the costs of engineering and testing large genomes (0.1 billion to 100 billion base pairs) in cell lines to 1/1000th of previous efforts within 10 years. This will include whole-genome engineering of human cell lines and other organisms of agricultural and public health significance or those needed to interpret human biological functions—i.e., gene regulation, genetic diseases, and evolutionary processes. This goal is necessarily ambitious, because building a human genome at today's prices would cost more than HGP-read (9) (see fig. S1). However, an expectation of HGP-write is that a sharp price drop will be catalyzed as new technology development occurs apace with advancement of the project, as with the cost of DNA sequencing in HGP-read. Small viral (10) and bacterial (11) genomes synthesized from scratch and organisms with recoded genomes (12) derived from large-scale genome editing (13) have demonstrated the feasibility and utility of synthetic genomes. By focusing on building the 3 Gb of human DNA, HGP-write would push current conceptual and technical limits by orders of magnitude and deliver important scientific advances. HGP-write will aim to address a number of human health challenges. Potential applications include growing transplantable human organs; engineering immunity to viruses in cell lines via genome-wide recoding (12); engineering cancer resistance into new therapeutic cell lines; and accelerating high-productivity, cost-efficient vaccine and pharmaceutical development by using human cells and organoids. The project could encourage broad intellectual property access via patent pooling. Extreme cost-reduction is feasible, as demonstrated by the $1000 genome grant program (2), as well as sharing of CRISPR tools from over 80 labs through www.addgene.org. Furthermore, because DNA synthesis, like sequencing and computation, is foundational technology, HGP-write could also facilitate biological engineering of many organisms, accelerating research and development (R&D) across a broad spectrum of life sciences and supporting basic R&D of new bio-based therapies, vaccines, materials, energy sources, disease vector control, and nutrition. . Pilot Projects Similarly to other Gb-scale genomic projects, including HGP-read, ENCODE (which aims to map genome functional elements), and Sc2.0 (which is synthesizing a heavily edited yeast genome) (14, 15), HGP-write would be conducted in phases with explicit goals and metrics. Each of the earlier large-scale projects began with pilot projects focused on a fraction of the genome, typically ∼1%. For HGP-write, the pilots should provide resources of immediate value for advanced biomedical research and/or biotech development. Technology development will likely also occur early in the project to propel large-scale genome design and engineering. A series of pilot projects making use of very long DNA sequences that are nonetheless short of a full genome are anticipated: (i) synthesizing “full” gene loci with accompanying noncoding DNA to help explain still-enigmatic roles of noncoding DNA variants in regulating gene expression and leading to more comprehensive models for the role of noncoding genetic variation in common human diseases and traits; (ii) constructing specific chromosomes—e.g., chromosome 21—or complex cancer genotypes to more comprehensively model human disease; (iii) producing specialized chromosomes encoding one or several pathways—e.g., all genes needed to make a prototrophic human cell or pathways to transform the pig genome to make it more amenable as a source for human organ transplantation; (iv) a potential transformation of gene therapy, with freedom to deliver many genes and control circuits to improve safety and efficacy, provided that delivery challenges can be met. Indeed, many substantial and useful innovations may be realized in such “stepping-stone” projects that are short of whole-genome reengineering but require substantial improvement in synthesis capacity of Mb- to Gb-sized DNA. Both genome-wide and more modest changes could be tested for their impact on, e.g., organoid development and function in vitro, facilitated by ongoing progress in stem cell differentiation and “organ-on-a-chip” technologies. Novel cell culture technologies may, in some cases, be many times more cost-effective and accurate than current whole-organism testing. Additional pilot projects being considered include (v) using induced pluripotent stem cells (16) to construct an “ultrasafe” human cell line via comprehensive recoding of protein-coding regions and deletion of corresponding genome features to increase safety of such a cell line (see the box); and (vi) developing a homozygous reference genome bearing the most common pan-human allele (or allele ancestral to a given human population) at each position to develop cells powered by “baseline” human genomes. Comparison with this baseline will aid in dissecting complex phenotypes, such as disease susceptibility. The pervasive nature of the required changes makes whole- or partial-genome synthesis an efficient route to these goals. Project Launch and Administration The goal is to launch HGP-write in 2016 with $100 million in committed support, from public, private, philanthropic, industry, and academic sources from around the world. The costs of the project lie not only in obtaining de novo synthesized DNA but in the assembly, integration, and functional assays required to evaluate and understand the modified genomes. Total project costs are difficult to estimate but would likely be less than the $3 billion cost of HGP-read. HGP-write could be implemented through one or more centers [similar to Centers of Excellence in Genomic Science (CEGS) and the Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) initiative centers] that will coordinate and support formation and work of multi-institutional and interdisciplinary research teams working in a highly integrated fashion responsive to and engaged with a broad public outreach. We celebrate 2016—the 25th anniversary of HGP-read—as a major step forward for human knowledge and health. In this spirit, we look forward to the launch of HGP-write.

Now we've gotten somewhere, but I don't know where we are. Prove it, you've already described where in the Bible, but describe now; where, in the Genome Project report support your thesis statement? Quote it!

The Human Genome Project is a global, long-term research effort to identify the estimated 30,000 genes in human DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) and to figure out the sequences of the chemical bases that make up human DNA. How, what are your findings? These are a psychological phenomenon that can be explained through science, most of it anyway, not biblical in nature. Let's get this straight, you're saying that: According to the Genome Project, the Bible proves that's original sin, satanism, white supremacy which affects all people is a scientific fact? Is that the thesis statement you're offering?

That's a mere statement, not a proposition nor a thesis statement. All research, scientific or otherwise must have bases; or the reason(s) for the research. For example: Thesis Statement: The Bible and science often reference information within of each, neither is purely part of the other. Proof (or premise): Science is the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. Whereas the Bible the Christian scriptures, consisting of the Old and New Testaments are only "stories"; or the Jewish scriptures, consisting of the Torah or Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa or Writings. Further development will involve details of my proof that "The Bible and science often reference within of each, neither is purely part of the other." which is why your replies are so confusing. While there's no need to complete and formal, it's only courtesy to provide a base for your assertions. Oh, and I was wrong to assume the original post was yours. You're just another commentator, as I.

Then we both agree it isn't science. We appear to be getting somewhere, but not quite, so what, to what end is your (still undefined theory) advanced? Why the Bible? Okay, good if you say so, what does that prove, exactly? That the Bible is scientifically proven by science or the other way around. In other words, what's your proposition, or thesis?

Ms. Pioneer1: The trollop

Are you saying that your reference is science or, not science?

Pioneer1: PLEASE, save your breath. You’ll probably need it to blow up your next date. Didn't the trollop, at least, teach you that much?

Just as the book of kings defines corruption, but there's no SCIENTIFIC correlation with any critical meaning. Supported by a woman's boot-shaped on a map proves, absolutely, nothing. How about a scientific formula, or graph depicting plot points or coherent 'scientific' figures! Interpreted as compared to what, exactly? OH MY GOD, are you inferring that religious beliefs and theory when systematically developed (theology) is a science? Next, you'll be telling us that schools and universities of divinity only are sound education. Please, don't do that.

Yes, I'm starting to get, really, good at it. I almost know all the right buttons to push. That's your fault though!!! Do you ever wonder what life would be like if the trollop had given you enough oxygen at birth, or was she smoking crack too?

Pioneer1: You have your entire life to be stupid. Why not take the rest of today off?

Yes, that involves science, real science. Trying to 'scientifically' associate that with the Bible is a theory, however. As a passion, interest, that's admirable but the connection(s) you're attempting is carrying your passion too far, I think, is nothing more than my opinion. You, however, have taken your opinionated passion to extremes. To speak of something does not make it science. Even if Einstien said it; if it cannot be proven it simply isn't science which bears, seriously, on the issue(s) as being factual!

I'm trying my hardest to see things from your perspective, but I can't my head that far up my butt!! I'm trying my hardest to see things from your perspective, but I can't my head that far up my butt!!

Ha, I KNEW IT, that works every time with you!!! Do yourself a favor and ignore anyone who tells you to be yourself. Bad idea, very bad in your case.

WHAT!!! Sometimes it’s better to keep your mouth shut and give the impression that you’re stupid than open it and remove all doubt.

The "LOL" man speaks of living in a box. NO, your abusive mother isn't here keeping an eye on me. She's there with you trying in vain to get you to do something besides grabbing her butt all day. My life is full of excitement and variety, love the convenience my laptop affords me, to monitor your foolishness, at will. Doesn't take much time to contradict your ignorance. OH YEAH, I forgot, you claim to not be well educated so it's okay. No wonder you use an avatar, are you that "300-pound man sitting on his bed" Trump was describing on his campaign trail? That's why you're not getting laid, huh?

NO, that's how you see me because it's your only defense to the many BS views I've called you out on, including you being an intersexed mason off-spring of a trollop. Furthermore, what do you know about the subject? Spouting off dumb inquiries.

FOR INSTANCE: The water flowed back and covered the chariots and horsemen–the entire army of Pharaoh that had followed the Israelites into the sea. Not one of them survived.But the Israelites went through the sea on dry ground, with a wall of water on their right and on their left.Exodus 14:28-29 The above passage is not a fact, it's a story about something no one can prove ever happened. NOW, If I advocate that God saved the Jews because he wanted the Jews to suffer in this life (expelled from every country on earth except America, the Holocaust, etc.) and know ever greater suffering in hell; that's a theory, and since I personally feel most all Jews are inherently evil, that's creating a conspiracy against them. As well as creating a lie against God. Finally, as I asserted before: the premises upon which you rely, "thy seed ... her seed ... his heel ... satan's seed ... 666 ... intersex" has little weight to support your supposition(s) that humankind is doomed is as unrealistic as trying to prove a plague will wipe-out all life on earth. First and foremost, you must first SHOW a connection, then you must PROVE it; scientifically. IMPOSSIBLE!!!!!!!!!!!