Reply
Wed 15 Dec, 2004 05:11 am
What do you make of the supposed discovery of a `God Gene'?
Now there is one names Gene!
Well...the more the merrier.
Dean Hamer the Man Behind the Book
Dean Hamer believes some of us have a variation of "VMAT2". He says it is a god gene (one of many), and if it is in a different variation it dubs you into being "spiritual" He believes "the" god gene evokes a feeling of "self-transcendence". This feeling is responsible for spirituality, yet not religion. "Our genes don't get directly involved in writing legislation (in what we believe)" said Hamer. He also says, "My findings are agonostic on the existence of God." If there's a God, there's bluntly a God. Just knowing what brain chemicals are involved in, acknowledging that, is not going to change the fact." He once believed he had found "the gay gene". This brought huge media fanfare. Once again, his work could not be replicated?-it was soon discarded.
While he was at the national cancer institute, Hamer found himself looking for the genetic responsibility for cigarette addiction. He took about 1,000 people and gave them a 140-question test. This was called the TCI, Temperament and Character Inventory. A man named Robert Cloninger identified the questions on the test, which had to do with self-transcendence. Interestingly enough, Hamer then decided to conduct a little "spirituality study on the side." Hamer studied the DNA of the subjects looking for differences between the spiritual, and the spiritually inept people. Then he soon found a variation in VMAT2. Within the variation, there were more "spiritual" subjects. (spiritual, according to the test). This is how he claims he found the god gene. VMAT2 is also responsible for cleaning out Neuro-toxins in the Brain. That is, the so-called God gene. "The presence of some chemicals in the brain that regulate mood and motor control is acceptable. But if the conclusion of Dean Hamer is based on a standardized quiz, I consider it as speculation only and not a scientific view!"
According to a review of his new book, found in the scientific American magazine. This article is entitled Faith Boosting Genes. In it we have no evidence supporting the god gene "findings" other than what he has presented in his book! His book has not been submitted to any scientific journal and has not gone through the riggers of peer-review. Many scientists have claimed that they found genes responsible for certain personality traits in the past "But as researches tried to replicate them, they added away in statistical noise". It happened to be Hamer in 1993 when he found the gay gene that faded away in statistical noise. Which it probably will happen to him again if he dares to submit his new findings to a scientific journalist.
If you look at Dean Hamer's findings from an evolutionist's point of view, it makes sense from the standpoint of "The Survival of the Fittest!" an article by Times Magazine. Is God In Our Genes, by Jeffrey Kluger says, "if we sometimes misuse the ideas of our Gods-and millenniums of holy wars prove that we do-the benefits of being a spiritual species will surly outweigh the bloodshed," what he is saying is that society will fall into utter chaos without religion. In other words having a religion provides us with morals. One example of this is found inside Canada's eastern arctic. In the isolated 500-person town of Pont Inlet every month there was at least one suicide. According to one man, almost every child was abused sexually and wife beatings were reported exceptionally often. Drugs were everywhere; it was so bad that a CNN reporter reported that the rate of suicides was 20 times the normal Canadian suicide rate. The land was barren because of the harsh weather was getting even more barren still! "It was like we were under a curse," a local leader reported. Then in 1996 many intercessors began to pray for revival. Somehow people were getting drawn to God and the mud paths to the local church were filled with people hungry for him. The community had a huge bonfire and according to the police with at least $80,000 dollars worth of illicit material was burned. Ever since there hasn't been one suicide! The barren land isn't so barren anymore just because of religion. (Story from Transformations 2, 1st story) Yes, without religion there is no "moral cop, " but why were the people not religious before this revival? I believe that it is because spirituality is from nurture, not nature as I think it isn't just inherited from one generation to the other, instead passed on through the word of mouth and in writings.
I think that Dean Hammer is a gay loving God hater. All of his work seems to be trying to promote evolution and provide justification for sin. "In support, Hamer offers up bits and pieces of research done by other scientists, along with sketches of spiritual people who he has met." -Zimmer. Personally, I think that Dean Hamer is not reading into our genes correctly. My thoughts believe he is reading our genes like a theistic creationist would read the bible, making whatever he/she reads be whatever they would like it to mean to him or herself.
DeadLeaf wrote:My thoughts believe he is reading our genes like a theistic creationist would read the bible, making whatever he/she reads be whatever they would like it to mean to him or herself.
And my thought is that would be a practice with which you have demonstrated affinity and expertise.
Well...if we're gonna get into this, let's first get some facts straight:
The Brain & Spirituality
"Mathew Alper, the author of The God Part of the Brain discussed his theory that human beings are genetically hard wired to experience some form of spirituality. He suggested that over time humanity evolved in this direction as a way of coping with the inevitable knowledge of their deaths. Being compelled to believe "there's something out there," was developed in a region of the brain, he contends.
Alper noted that a recent Time Magazine cover story titled 'Is God in Our Genes?' referenced many of his original ideas, but credited them to author Dean Hamer, whose book on the subject recently came out (Alper's book was published years earlier).
Beyond the "god" part of the brain, Alper said there is mounting evidence for a "love" part of the brain. He cited studies that show women can release hormones such as oxytocin, that create a chemistry of bonding, such as with their newborn. He also asserted that criminal behavior can be traced to genetic defects or neurotransmitter imbalances, and that ultimately manipulating or reprogramming an offender's brain chemistry would be more useful than imprisonment."
Alper is the guy who started all this. I would suggest reading his book, and comparing it to Hamer's, for anyone interested in a proper debate on the topic. :wink:
Doubt proper debate much figures in the lives of those given to shoutin' down folks not in line with their own particular take in matters of this sort - can't be another point of view to consider, ya know - whether its 'cause god said so or 'cause the godless say so. Its pretty much all a matter of intolerance, ignorance, preconception, and arrogance from whatever perspective.
hhmm... I see!
well thanks for the info, I did not know that alper even existed! I will look into his work. I also agree, it seems much better just to alter their brain chemistry than to send these women to prison. but I think it will take along time to be able to just know how to "alter" someones brain chemistry without the use of conventional drugs, through the means of genetic enginering that is.
hhmm,
timberlandko wrote:Doubt proper debate much figures in the lives of those given to shoutin' down folks not in line with their own particular take in matters of this sort - can't be another point of view to consider, ya know - whether its 'cause god said so or 'cause the godless say so. Its pretty much all a matter of intolerance, ignorance, preconception, and arrogance from whatever perspective.
yes I do agree with you on some level, but as I said before, but every one believes in somthing, whether a God or Gods exist or none at all etc.. No one is or ever will be completly un-Biased, can you agree with me on that? and the person must have "faith" -Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing. (dictionary.com) Rick Joyner wrote a book called -Leadership, The Power Of A Creative Life- in it he says that faith is spelled R-I-S-K everything believe in has some level (even a very small one) of being "not true"-me don't you agree timberlandko? faith can be mistaken as ignorance, but really ignorance is "The condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed."-dictionary.com. .. we all are ignorant to some degree. that is true. "opinions are like arm pits, we all have a few of them and they all stink!" -Mr plowman CSCL principle. " Religion-
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
to end all this "jibberish" and get to my point. what I am trying to prove is what a Albert Einstein said. as if it is not "proven" every day.
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
Some agreement DeadLeaf ... but just some. I'm a straight-line sort; to me, "Faith", most particularly in the religious sense, equates to superstition - unfounded, illogical belief.
I would not agree with you on the everyone has to believe in a god or gods or none at all. I believe none of those things, i beleive in myself.
If everyone had that supposed part of their brain removed that makes us spiritual, would the concept of god exist anymore? I say concept, because it could very well be that a god exists anyway, but we just do not come up with the concept.
And Dead Leaf, my interpretation of Albert einsteins quote is that "religion" is the motivation to find the unknown, and to move forward. Of course with out this motivation, science does not have application for furtherment. And of course motivation without any means to achieve it (science) is useless, or "blind"
hey guys, in the article I wrote, I did not mention faith, or anything about God, a Creationist is not a Godly man, he is someone who believes that we were created, I havnt posted in so long because my dad Cought me on here and said "stop arguing with these pathetic low lifes they will just make exuse after exuse why they are right" (but thats what dbate is all about" if I get cought again im in big trouble. but its "Religeon verses religeon not science verses religon, an evelutionist has no "real" proof of his beliefe, just as a creationist, and there is alot of facts proving both sides wrong, so stop giving me this ****, ......... to prove what i just said, I wrote another article. which will follow this: