RNA Editing of Octopus Linked to Alien Life!

[Salvador]

I'm also suspicious that this looks like milking an opportunity. "life may have been seeded here on Earth by life-bearing comets as soon as conditions on Earth allowed it to flourish " as stated by some of the 33 seems reasonable and worthy of exploration - certainly if we ever find life on a comet! However stretching that to "octopuses are likely of extraterrestrial origin" for me is a step too far.

I had the same preconception when I read the article, but then these 33 scientists and authors seem to make a compelling case for the extraterrestrial origin of octopuses when they point out that "The transformative genes leading from the consensus ancestral nautilus to the common cuttlefish to squid to the common octopus can’t be found in any pre-existing life form." A plausible reason for this is given as “It is plausible then to suggest they [octopuses] seem to be borrowed from a far distant ‘future’ in terms of terrestrial evolution, or more realistically from the cosmos at large.”

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I had the same preconception when I read the article, but then these 33 scientists and authors seem to make a compelling case ...

How would you know?

 

[Salvador]

Another thought of course is that they dont "just"
come together. What exactly that "not-just" consists
of is something to work on. Or of course, "just"
say "goddidit".

I'd rather say aliens did it, because there is evidence of extraterrestrial life and zero evidence of god's existence.

Extraterrestrial intelligence has left its mark in our genetic code. Each codon relates to 3 other particular codons having the same particular type of initial nucleobase and sequential nucleobase subsequently then followed by a different ending nucleobase. Half of these 4 set of codon groups ( whole family codons ) each code for the same particular amino acid. The other half of those 4 set of codon groups ( split codons ) don't code for the same amino acid. So then, in the case of whole family codons, there are 37 amino acid peptide chain nucleons for each relevant nucleobase determinant of how a particular amino acid gets coded. Hence, the numeric message of 37 gets unambiguously and factually conveyed to us descendants of our cosmic ancestor(s)with our genetic code invented by a superior intelligence beyond that of anybody presently bound to Earth.

 

[Salvador]

Damn scientific community! Thank God we have those like you who know better!

Not just me, but these 33 scientists from respectable institutions like the University of Alberta's Department of Biochemistry and the Center for the Physics of Living Organisms at Michigan Technological University suggests octopuses might have an extraterrestrial origin.

 

[Salvador]

Proof! Phatoooey! Splat!

The trip wire of the booby trap is 'plausible,' and brings to serious question making any claims of 'proof,' which science does not prove things. Legitimate Research papers DO NOT make such 'plausible' claims based on cut and paste 'sources' without a sound basis in Genetic science.

RNA insertion from bacteria and viruses is well known and can explain other 'sources, and the known ability of these organisms to edit there own DNA.'

The rest of the story . . .

From: An Insane Paper Tests The Limits of Science by Claiming Octopuses Came From Space

An Insane Paper Tests The Limits of Science by Claiming Octopuses Came From Space
Don't laugh. It's serious.


MIKE MCRAE
16 MAY 2018
A summary of decades of research on a rather 'out-there' idea involving viruses from space has recently been published, and it's raising questions on just how scientific we can be when it comes to speculating on the history of life on Earth.


It's easy to throw around words like crackpot, rogue, and maverick in describing the scientific fringe, but every now and then a paper like this comes along, leaving us blinking owlishly, unsure of where to even begin.

A total of 33 names are listed as authors on this review, which was published by Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology. The journal is peer reviewed and fairly well cited. So it's not exactly small, or a niche pay-for-publish source.

Science writer Stephen Fleischfresser goes into depth on the background of two of the better known scientists involved: Edward Steele and Chandra Wickramasinghe. It's well worth a read.

For a tl;dr version, Steele is an immunologist who already has a fringe reputation for his views on evolution that relies on acquiring gene changes determined by the influence of the environment rather than random mutations, in what he calls meta-Lamarckism.

Wickramasinghe, on the other hand, has had a somewhat less controversial career, recognised for empirically confirming Sir Fred Hoyle's hypothesis describing the production of complex carbon molecules on interstellar dust.


Wickramasinghe and Hoyle also happened to be responsible for another space biology thesis. Only this one is based on more than just the origins of organic chemistry.

The Hoyle Wickramasinghe (H-W) thesis of Cometary (Cosmic) Biology makes the rather simple claim that the direction of evolution has been significantly affected by biochemistry that didn't start on our planet.

In Wickramasinghe's own words, "Comets are the carriers and distributors of life in the cosmos and life on Earth arose and developed as a result of cometary inputs."

Those inputs, Wickramasinghe argues, aren't limited to a generous sprinkling of space-baked amino acids, either.

Rather, they include viruses that insert themselves into organisms, pushing their evolution into whole new directions.

The report, titled "Cause of Cambrian Explosion – Terrestrial or Cosmic?", pulls on existing research to conclude that a rain of extra-terrestrial retroviruses played a key role in the diversification of life in our oceans roughly half a billion years ago.

"Thus retroviruses and other viruses hypothesised to be liberated in cometary debris trails both can potentially add new DNA sequences to terrestrial genomes and drive further mutagenic change within somatic and germline genomes," the authors write.


Let that sink in for a moment. And take a deep breath before continuing, because that was the tame part.

It was during this period that a group of molluscs known as cephalopods first stretched out their tentacles from beneath their shells, branching into a stunning array of sizes and shapes in what seemed like a remarkably short time frame.

The genetics of these organisms, which today include octopuses, squid, and cuttlefish, are as weird as the animals themselves, due in part to their ability to their ability to edit their DNA on the fly.

College level Genetics and paleontology level courses have long taught this, and it is nothing new.

The authors of the paper make the rather audacious claim that these genetic oddities might be a sign of life from space.

The authors do make a valid point in support of their conclusion when they point out the " 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) ( Reference: Liscovitch-Brauer, et al.Trade-off between transcriptome plasticity and genome evolution in cephalopods Cell, 169 (2017), pp. 191-202)
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 1–3% 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). (Reference: (Reference: Liscovitch-Brauer, et al.Trade-off between transcriptome plasticity and genome evolution in cephalopods Cell, 169 (2017), pp. 191-202) 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, resulting in a nonsynonymous amino acid change (Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). (Reference: Liscovitch-Brauer, et al. Trade-off between transcriptome plasticity and genome evolution in cephalopods Cell, 169 (2017), pp. 191-202) 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.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Not just me, but these 33 scientists from respectable institutions ...

Well, then, that's altogether different.

 

[Salvador]

Ah . . . no dumb founded scientists with a legitimate background in Genetics and Paleontology. I have enough undergraduate and graduate courses in Genetics to know better as my previous post demonstrates.

There is a legitimate 'panspermia' application of the evidence that some amino acids that contribute to the abiogenesis of life did arrive from meteorites within our own solar system.

Ah . . . no dumb founded scientists with a legitimate background in Genetics and Paleontology. I have enough undergraduate and graduate courses in Genetics to know better as my previous post demonstrates.

There is a legitimate 'panspermia' application of the evidence that some amino acids that contribute to the abiogenesis of life did arrive from meteorites within our own solar system.

These 33 doctorate level scientists and authors of scientific peer-reviewed research on panspermia theory have noted: "Many ....“unearthly” properties of organisms can be plausibly explained if we admit the enlarged cosmic biosphere that is indicated by modern astronomical research" –(for example)" ...discoveries of exoplanets. The average distance between habitable planets in our galaxy now to be reckoned in light years – typically 5 light years (Wickramasinghe et al., 2012). " (Reference: N.C. Wickramasinghe, et al. Life-bearing primordial planets in the solar vicinity Astrophys. Space Sci, 341 (2012), pp. 295-299)

 

[Salvador]

I understand why you use such noncommittal language when communicating these types of things. It makes sense to do so, and is one of the parts of this post that is respectable. Hopefully you understand also why you must use such subtleties when proposing these ideas - you seem to in the majority of the post, at least, but what troubles me is the poll at the start - "Are you convinced panspermia is a proven theory?" I don't think anything you have posted, in any way supports panspermia as a "proven theory."

RNA editing of octopuses alone hasn't convinced me panspermia is a proven theory.
The fact that extraterrestrial intelligence has left its mark in our genetic code has convinced me that panspermia is correct as evident by the how the numeric and semantic message of 037 appears in our genetic code. Each codon relates to 3 other particular codons having the same particular type of initial nucleobase and sequential nucleobase subsequently then followed by a different ending nucleobase. Half of these 4 set of codon groups ( whole family codons ) each code for the same particular amino acid. The other half of those 4 set of codon groups ( split codons ) don't code for the same amino acid. So then, in the case of whole family codons, there are 37 amino acid peptide chain nucleons for each relevant nucleobase determinant of how a particular amino acid gets coded. Start codons express 0 at the beginning of 37 Hence, the numeric message of 037 gets unambiguously and factually conveyed to us descendants of our cosmic ancestor(s)with our genetic code invented by a superior intelligence beyond that of anybody presently bound to Earth.

 

[Salvador]

All I have to add to this is from SNOPES

Does Octopus DNA Come from Space?
"Researchers didn't discover that octopus DNA is "alien," or that it originated anywhere but on Earth, although a few have suggested the possibility."

Beyond that, I got nothing, take it for what it is worth

A compelling case for the RNA editing of octopuses having an extraterrestrial origin isn't full-prove evidence in support of panspermia. However, what I failed to mention at the beginning of this thread, what I've just recently revealed is that panspermia is proven theory because of the fact that extraterrestrial intelligence has left its mark in our genetic code ....as evident by how the numeric and semantic message of 037 appears in our genetic code. Each codon relates to 3 other particular codons having the same particular type of initial nucleobase and sequential nucleobase subsequently then followed by a different ending nucleobase. Half of these 4 set of codon groups ( whole family codons ) each code for the same particular amino acid. The other half of those 4 set of codon groups ( split codons ) don't code for the same amino acid. So then, in the case of whole family codons, there are 37 amino acid peptide chain nucleons for each relevant nucleobase determinant of how a particular amino acid gets coded. Start codons express 0 at the beginning of 37 Hence, the numeric message of 037 gets unambiguously and factually conveyed to us descendants of our cosmic ancestor(s)with our genetic code invented by a superior intelligence beyond that of anybody presently bound to Earth.

 

[Salvador]

Well, it is interesting. But it's speculation, pure and simple, and rather a stretch...

The basic problem with any panspermia proposal is (aside from a lack of any direct evidence at this time) is that all it does is push the question of the origin of life, or the genes in question in this article, back to someplace other than earth and sometime before about 4.1 billion years ago. And then it becomes a 'just so' story.

Until now, I was withholding the evidence of our genetic code having a signal of extraterrestrial intelligence as evidence for panspermia. So now there is yes indeedy this direct evidence for panspermia.

 

[Salvador]

Panspermia has a few obstacles to overcome. We already know that species can change, so odd DNA is not evidence of aliens. Secondly there has been plenty of time. Third there is a bias in presuming biogenesis will happen elsewhere.

Our genetic code is indeed strong evidence for panspermia. There is no other plausible way explanation for how the numeric and semantic message of 037 unambiguously appears in our genetic code as each codon relates to 3 other particular codons having the same particular type of initial nucleobase and sequential nucleobase subsequently then followed by a different ending nucleobase. Half of these 4 set of codon groups ( whole family codons ) each code for the same particular amino acid. The other half of those 4 set of codon groups ( split codons ) don't code for the same amino acid. So then, in the case of whole family codons, there are 37 amino acid peptide chain nucleons for each relevant nucleobase determinant of how a particular amino acid gets coded. Start codons express 0 at the beginning of 37. Hence, the numeric message of 037 gets unambiguously and factually conveyed to us descendants of our cosmic ancestor(s)with our genetic code invented by a superior intelligence beyond that of anybody presently bound to Earth.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Until now, I was withholding the evidence of our genetic code having a signal of extraterrestrial intelligence as evidence for panspermia. So now there is yes indeedy this direct evidence for panspermia.

I'm glad to see that you're so easily persuaded!

 

[Thief]

did anyone mention?.....copper based blood

and if you travel in space long enough.....your bones thin to nothing

 

[shunyadragon]

I'm glad to see that you're so easily persuaded!

Reruns from the X-Files.

 

[Dell]

If any of those supposed comets made it to Mars or are still in orbit, we should find some evidence of panspermia soon or in just a few generations. If panspermia were to be true, the host planet would probably be long gone if it was not associated with a red long living star. The fact it got here by comet might suggest the host planet had a catastrophe. The idea of tracing it back somewhere in the galaxy would be disturbing, we may never find its origin.

I would rather hope in the near future we can produce life from molecules here and prove its ability to mutate to complexity naturally on Earth. That would be better news for the idea of extraterrestrial life since it could happen in a planets first billion or two years if conditions exist. Statistically better odds we aren't alone, but that said being alone might be a good thing too...

Hopefully soon the panspermia idea can be given due... either creditable or buried.

 

[Nigel Hoath]

"Given that the complex sets of new genes in the Octopus may have not come solely from horizontal gene transfers or simple random mutations of existing genes or by simple duplicative expansions, [but possibly a combination of these ] it is then logical to surmise, given our current [minimal] knowledge of the biology of comets and their debris, the new genes and their viral drivers most likely came from space".

This statement is clearly flawed. The logical conclusion is: most likely we are seeing evidense of what appears to be an accelerated evolutionary process. We see evidense of such events frequently. We do not see evidense of extra terrestrial interference at the gene level in the development of life on earth.

But I'd like to hear what these 33 scientists imagine was the scenario here. What, where, when and how. Anyone any thoughts.

 

[exchemist]

I had the same preconception when I read the article, but then these 33 scientists and authors seem to make a compelling case for the extraterrestrial origin of octopuses when they point out that "The transformative genes leading from the consensus ancestral nautilus to the common cuttlefish to squid to the common octopus can’t be found in any pre-existing life form." A plausible reason for this is given as “It is plausible then to suggest they [octopuses] seem to be borrowed from a far distant ‘future’ in terms of terrestrial evolution, or more realistically from the cosmos at large.”

No they do not remotely make a "compelling" case, as is evidenced by the derision with which this paper has been greeted by most other scientists in the field.

The huge problem with this idea is that it is a lot more far-fetched than a standard panspermia hypothesis. If this idea were true, then we would have to believe that life first arose on Earth, with all its characteristic biochemistry that so strongly implies a single common ancestor for everything, and then, alien life was suddenly added to the mix, without altering any of this biochemistry! If you look at the cellular machinery of an octopus cell, it is just the same as that of other eukaryotes.

How likely is it that alien life would just happen to utilise exactly he same biochemistry as terrestrial life that had arisen independently, several billion years previously?

 

[shunyadragon]

The authors do make a valid point in support of their conclusion when they point out the " 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) ( Reference: Liscovitch-Brauer, et al.Trade-off between transcriptome plasticity and genome evolution in cephalopods Cell, 169 (2017), pp. 191-202)
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 1–3% 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). (Reference: (Reference: Liscovitch-Brauer, et al.Trade-off between transcriptome plasticity and genome evolution in cephalopods Cell, 169 (2017), pp. 191-202) 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, resulting in a nonsynonymous amino acid change (Liscovitch-Brauer et al., 2017). (Reference: Liscovitch-Brauer, et al. Trade-off between transcriptome plasticity and genome evolution in cephalopods Cell, 169 (2017), pp. 191-202) 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.

The bold above does not take into consideration the following reference:

"It was during this period that a group of molluscs known as cephalopods first stretched out their tentacles from beneath their shells, branching into a stunning array of sizes and shapes in what seemed like a remarkably short time frame.

The genetics of these organisms, which today include octopuses, squid, and cuttlefish, are as weird as the animals themselves, due in part to their ability to their ability to edit their DNA on the fly."

 

[Salvador]

No they do not remotely make a "compelling" case, as is evidenced by the derision with which this paper has been greeted by most other scientists in the field.

The huge problem with this idea is that it is a lot more far-fetched than a standard panspermia hypothesis. If this idea were true, then we would have to believe that life first arose on Earth, with all its characteristic biochemistry that so strongly implies a single common ancestor for everything, and then, alien life was suddenly added to the mix, without altering any of this biochemistry! If you look at the cellular machinery of an octopus cell, it is just the same as that of other eukaryotes.

How likely is it that alien life would just happen to utilise exactly he same biochemistry as terrestrial life that had arisen independently, several billion years previously?

No they do not remotely make a "compelling" case, as is evidenced by the derision with which this paper has been greeted by most other scientists in the field.

The huge problem with this idea is that it is a lot more far-fetched than a standard panspermia hypothesis. If this idea were true, then we would have to believe that life first arose on Earth, with all its characteristic biochemistry that so strongly implies a single common ancestor for everything, and then, alien life was suddenly added to the mix, without altering any of this biochemistry! If you look at the cellular machinery of an octopus cell, it is just the same as that of other eukaryotes.

How likely is it that alien life would just happen to utilise exactly he same biochemistry as terrestrial life that had arisen independently, several billion years previously?

 

[Windwalker]

It is just that bad science must be identified and crushed. And that is the duty of us all.

Like robed Grand Inquisitors? "Stamp out heresy and heretics" wherever you suspect it exists? Now while this may seem like a good idea in the light of the pseudosciences, those protectors of the faith in the general population to stand up for the science that scientists do, the problem is we aren't all scientists and qualified to do so. And while some ideas are clearly nutty, others may also appear nutty too when they aren't, because they don't fit the prevailing orthodoxy. Progress gets halted in understanding by the "poo pooing" of the orthodox. Be suspicious. Be critical. But also be open. Controversial, even outlandish claims, can be doorways into radically new territory.

The above comment has nothing to do with the "Octopus Controversy", which is likely just a popular distortion of the actual science because it sounds sensational. It's about the whole "orthodox thinking" problem in all areas of human knowledge. We become far too attached to our models as if they are reality themselves, and it can become a trap for the mind. Yes, we know the earth isn't flat. But once upon a time, the idea it was round was completely rubbish in the minds of those who saw it as flat, who sought to stamp out such nonsense as their perceived duty to the truth too. Despite advances in our knowledge, our humanness remains largely the same. Deny first, later accept when it's perceived safe to when everyone else is.