Denis Noble explains his revolutionary theory of genetics | Genes are not the blueprint for life

Denis Noble explains where Dawkins went wrong.

Has the unique power of genes been overstated?

We tend to think that genes make us who we are. But what if this is the wrong way around? Rather than bottom-up, might nature work top-down? Join biologist, Denis Noble, to explore how organisms create their own destiny using genes.

#biology #genetics #dawkins

One of the pioneers of systems biology, Denis Noble is a Professor Emeritus at the University of Oxford. Renowned for challenging convention, Noble explores the interplay between an organism and its genes.

[TheInstituteOfArtAndIdeas]

Has the unique power of genes been overstated? Leave your thoughts in the comments.

[pan_cimrman]

You truncate the video and then demand payment to see the rest??? You waste my time by not indicating it was a partial video? I'm not gong to follow your link after that cynical and manipulative technique. I was interested in looking further into the IAI before that tactic. Goodbye.

[conceptinterface]

How supremely annoying and counter-productive is this bait & switch video contrivance. I even went through the dishonest claim on the IAI site, that I could continue watching if I signed up for email, but I ended up at the same paywall obstacle on their website. Apparently there is no straightforward way to continue this video, although it seems money might solve that problem. After wasting my time trying to continue, I've learned something very important about the IAI -- they are comfortable to prioritize clickbait and bait & switch sales tricks over the science they claim to promote. Very disappointing. It's perfectly fine to erect a paywall for certain content, but not the way it's done by the IAI. They have thoroughly alienated me, and other comments show I am not alone in resenting this kind of manipulation.

[JackT]

I have read and adored most of Dawkins’ books and recently read Noble’s ‘Dance to the Tune of Life’. Whilst I don’t fully endorse Noble’s repudiation of the gene-centric view of life, I think his work is fascinating and has a lot to tell us about the function of non-genetic, physiological actuation in regulating the cell and precipitating evolutionary development. To call him a charlatan or to outright denigrate his work is a perfect demonstration of the pig-headedness and dogmatic attitudes of those who unconditionally subscribe to the biological orthodoxy because they feel threatened by the prospect of a fringe scientist challenging someone as revered as Dawkins.

“Don’t take refuge in the false security of consensus.”

[sepehrjelveh]

I clicked Your link to your website but once I accessed this video it repeatedly froze. . You should allow the entire video to play on your YouTube channel so people can receive the knowledge and information instead of using it as a commercial teaser so that people are forced onto your deficient website.

[isatousarr]

The notion that genes are not the sole blueprint for life underscores the complexity of biological development. While genes provide essential instructions for building and maintaining organisms, they interact with environmental factors and epigenetic modifications that influence how genetic information is expressed. This perspective highlights the intricate interplay between genetic and non-genetic factors in shaping living systems. How can this understanding of the gene-environment interaction enhance our approaches to personalized medicine and disease prevention, and what implications does it have for future research in genetics and developmental biology?

[anthonybrett]

Denis and Michael Levin need to get together for a pod cast. They seem to be on the same wavelength. The genes don't contain instructions for morphology. And cells problem solve to achieve a goal, without a nervous system. (William James definition of intelligence.)

[josemaanmieli]

The issue is not that we cannot read a message in the genome but that something is a message only for the messenger. Information alone does not make a computer work.

[nandfednu]

what Dr Noble is trying to warn us of is the danger of using a computer programming language without understanding its compiler- biologists are philosophically focusing on the syntax of a language they haven't defined...

[ValQuinn]

It's strange people accusing Noble of misunderstanding "Dawkins' theory". Gene-centred evolution is not Dawkins' theory, he is a populariser of it. Dawkins' magnum opus is probably the concept of the extended phenotype. Meanwhile Noble is a pioneer in mathematical biology. It's ridiculous that people take Dawkins as the be all and end all of biology simply because they don't know any other biologists - and then think they are being scientific by doing so!

[Triadistic]

Because most diseases are environmental and genes interact with the environment and we are still discovering many new properties of chromosomes, it does not mean that they are not the metaphorical blueprint, it is just more complex.

[mikoajnalewaj]

11:09 He says that after the encounter with the virus some of the genes mutate to create antibodies that will bind to the invader. That’s not what mainly happens.
• The idea that immune cells “mutate their genes” after encountering a virus might be a reference to the somatic hypermutation process, but this doesn’t happen immediately or solely in response to a new pathogen. Instead, it’s a refinement process that happens after initial recognition, aiming to increase the effectiveness of the antibodies being produced.
• The initial recognition of the virus is based on the existing pool of diverse antibodies generated by V(D)J recombination, not by mutating genes in response to the virus itself.

[dr_IkjyotSinghKohli]

As usual, the vast majority of people in this comments section: have not studied biology at any university level, don't have any background in biology, have not published any papers in the field of biology, and have not done any proper research in the field. This is fine in itself. However, you all then seem confident to criticize / critique Denis Noble's theories, who is an actual, real and non-YouTube expert in the field. The same people are philosophically biased towards Dawkins and are willing to discount theories they have not understood just to keep that up.

[wokeymcwokeface]

The fact that environment can modify genes doesn’t refute the fact that it is through genes that we realize behavior and actions!

[roberttormey]

Dawkins ideas were obsolete as soon as Barbara McClintock was given her Nobel in 1983

[ishaanbatta]

Many Pranaams. By far the best words I have heard on Karma Yoga, and I can’t believe he spoke only for 15 minutes!

[alanjenkins]

This is just a difference in perspective. The end result is exactly the same. A species resists diversity by rejecting the malformed, but the genes and their control mechanisms mutate randomly creating difference. Sometime the difference gives a survival advantage, but mostly it does not.

[rheijnen]

Assuming we're talking organizational layers in matter here (physics is not chemistry is not biology, etc.) and rather than bottom-up, nature works top-down, then this would implicate there has to also be a layer above the top one.... This layer above the top-layer is the one that mind is in the process of figuring out. Meaning that all layers were also at one time getting figured out by mind as the layer above the aggregate of already explicated layers. Explicated meaning transferred from mind into matter. This is the relationship between mind and matter. The figuring out by mind pertains to weak emergence, while the transfer of the organizational layer into matter pertains to strong emergence. Homer's Odyssey is about this process involving weak and strong emergence. Odysseus' journey represents weak emergence, and when he reveals his identity to Penelope this represents strong emergence. Penelope and her consort use the pattern that Odysseus came back with to weave the fabric of matter with.

[sanjivgupta]

Denis Nobel's argument is understandable. It is well known that in crocodiles sex of the progeny is determined by temperature of incubation of the egg. Eggs incubated at temp. around 30 degree C are female and those arnoud 34 degree are male.

[henrybrowne]

Sorry to just post and go, but I've said this myself many times already. For Chrissake, genes are blueprints for proteins, not traits necessarily--usually not. Maybe eye color, which might be where this misconception comes from. We know now about epigenetics, the subtle mechanism which turns genes on and off. The epigenetic mechanism represents an immensely flexible system that enables the organism full adaptability. I mean, think about how static a system in which traits are hard-coded more or less for the duration, would be. Not very adaptable.