I got better

I would think Nature does Building process using the DNA code to construct the final version.

@jlynn37 Exactly, The LEGO of the biochemical world.

I wonder if it can make a fire station or a Batmobile!

@Geoffrey51 Kind of, when they put a mouses eye DNA into a fruit fly. It grows another eye but not a mouse eye. It grows a fly eye. That means that we (coz we are mammals too) have in us the capacity to have fly eyes.

@Geoffrey51 A fire station or a Batmobile is not part of the biochemical world and does no contain DNA. Of course you already knew that.

The short version is. That when proteins are needed other proteins release messenger molecules, those then attach themselves to the required part of the DNA in the nucleus which unzips. RNA copies are then made, which then leave the nucleus and make their way to structures called ribosome's. Which are little machines made of proteins that staple together amino acids according to the sequence they read from the RNA copies, to form new proteins. It is all utterly fascinating and well worth reading up even for none biologists.

@Fernapple Thanks for your brief explanation. I tried to read an on-line article but it was too advanced for me. Yes, the topic is very fascinating.

I’m still very much amazed that the messenger molecules would find their way to the correct place on a very long chain of DNA, and then travel unprompted to the correct ribosome. That this very complicated process of protein synthesis could occur automatically boggles the mind, but that is only the start. I have the feeling that no one fully understands the process. Am I correct?

What do you think of Rupert Sheldrake’s ideas?

@WilliamFleming Yes I do not think that anyone does understand it fully. But I have not read any R. Sheldrake.

One small point though. I do not think that they have to travel to the correct ribosome, I think all ribosomes will do all things.

@jlynn37 yes it was a joke

@jlynn37, @WilliamFleming Not followed Sheldrake’s work since the 90’s but I think he was on to something although I am sure many of the scientific community would dispute it.

@Geoffrey51 More likely the scientific community is howling in derision. He’s still around I believe. I read The Science Delusion from 2012 and he has a newer book on spirituality.

He is highly qualified in biology and he can write what he really thinks since he is not associated with academia. I doubt Fernapple would approve of such far-out ideas—I was sort of needling her. I ought to be ashamed of myself.