Of Strange Flesh - re 666 & chemistry (fwd)

Alexander Berezin berezin at MCMAIL.CIS.MCMASTER.CA
Tue Dec 31 12:05:05 EST 1996



On 31 Dec 1996, "Alan \"Uncle Al\" Schwartz" wrote:

> Kerry Delf <kld at jersey.uoregon.edu> wrote:
> >
> >PLEASE CC REPLIES TO <kld at jersey.uoregon.edu>
> >---------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >I know that the post below is simply the esoteric jibberish of a
> >kook-ranter;  unfortunately, there are those who take it seriously.
> >
> >I am no microbiologist, and therefore do not have the information at my
> >fingertips with which to debunk this bizarre theory -- I'm hoping someone
> >with more knowledge of the subject can provide me <kld at jersey.uoregon.edu>
> >with a brief, educated explanation as to why human biology just doesn't
> >work this way.  :)
> >
> >The basic claim made here by Adam Willson (based on the theories of a
> >well-known [in certain circles] kook, Tani Jantsang) is that there are two
> >separate species we label "human":  one is based on Carbon-12 (6 protons,
> >6 neutrons), while the other is based on some other Carbon isotope.
> >
> >Anyone care to take a stab at this one? 
> 
> C-13 algae are rountinely grown from C-13 CO2 to manufacture 
> high-enrichment C-13 labelled biochemicals.  The stuff is obscenely 
> expensive.
> 
> The human claim is plain stooopid, and trivially discounted via mass spec 
> or C-13 NMR of a tissue sample (or exhalation) if the thermodynamic 
> argument is over your head.

May not be that stupid. There was a paper(s) a while
ago with reporting on the isotopically-replaced mice
(mice with some 20 % of the body oxygen-16 replaced
by oxygen-18). Yes, it might be an awfully expensive
experiments, but scientifically it is not impossible
to study mass isotopic replacements in higher organisms,
though venturing humans faces obvious ethical problems.

Beside, there is may be "something" indeed in the
fact that the prime life element, carbon-12 does
indeed has 6 protons, 6 neutrons, and 6 electrons
making it "666"-element. Of course, you can dismiss
the analogy with the Beast number as gibberish, but
the puzzle is obviously here. It is the same kind
perhaps, as (still unexplained) mentioning of by 
the Johnathan Swift in Gulliver Travels (almost
exactly) paramters of Mars' two sattelites, long
before there were telsecopes powerful enough to 
observe them.

> 
> -- 
> Alan "Uncle Al" Schwartz
> UncleAl0 at ix.netcom.com ("zero" before @)
> http://www.ultra.net.au/~wisby/uncleal.htm
>  (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children, Democrats, and most mammals)
> "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"  The Net!
> 
> 
> 
> 



More information about the Bioforum mailing list