Creation is not an end result but is continuous

This ChatGPT conversation proves to my heart the possibility of Your personal imprint within my life – not only at my creation but also throughout my life. It shows a personal care and love for me that was set at Your first thought of my existence and even includes the possibility of change to my DNA as that existence continues. It’s not that I did not believe this possible, but more the possibility of change deep within as I move forward with You. My life is not set – all possibilities exist, and change can happen at any time. I’ve read of the miracles of these possibilities, and now they have been confirmed specifically to me.

Somatic Mutations and Individual DNA

June 14, 2023

Is it still considered that about 97 percent of DNA is junk?

The notion that a large portion of DNA is "junk" has been subject to scientific debate and reevaluation in recent years. Our understanding of DNA has evolved, and researchers have discovered that many non-coding regions once considered "junk DNA" actually have functional roles in gene regulation and other cellular processes. While it's challenging to determine an exact percentage, it's generally recognized that a significant portion of the genome is involved in important biological functions, even if not directly coding for proteins. Further research is still underway to uncover the full extent of DNA's functions and the precise proportion of functional elements within the genome.

Is it possible that this junk DNA is coded specifically to the individual and not general to humanity?

Yes, it is possible that certain portions of non-coding DNA may be specific to individuals rather than universally present in all humans. Genetic variations, such as single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), can lead to differences in non-coding regions among individuals. These variations can contribute to unique traits, susceptibility to diseases, or other characteristics that vary from person to person. Understanding these individual differences in non-coding DNA and their potential functional implications is an active area of research in genomics and personalized medicine.

Can this specific individual non-coding DNA change during the individual’s lifetime or is it set at birth?

The non-coding DNA that is specific to an individual is generally established at the time of conception and remains relatively stable throughout that person's lifetime. This individual-specific DNA, including variations in non-coding regions, is inherited from the parents and does not typically undergo significant changes during an individual's lifetime. However, it's important to note that there are some exceptions to this general rule.

Certain mechanisms can cause changes in the non-coding DNA over time. For example, somatic mutations can occur in non-coding regions due to environmental factors, aging, or other influences, but these changes are typically restricted to specific cells or tissues and are not passed on to future generations. Additionally, epigenetic modifications, which can affect gene expression without altering the underlying DNA sequence, can occur throughout an individual's life and potentially impact non-coding regions as well.

Overall, while the core set of individual-specific non-coding DNA is established at birth, there can be some limited changes or modifications during an individual's lifetime due to somatic mutations or epigenetic alterations.

Can you define ‘somatic mutation’?

Certainly! A somatic mutation refers to a genetic alteration or change that occurs in the cells of an organism's body (somatic cells), excluding the cells involved in reproduction (germ cells). These mutations can happen during the normal course of an individual's life due to various factors such as exposure to environmental agents (e.g., radiation, chemicals), errors during DNA replication, or other cellular processes.

Somatic mutations are not passed on to offspring as they are not present in the germ cells (sperm or egg cells) that give rise to the next generation. Instead, they are limited to the individual in which they occur and affect only a specific group of cells or tissues. These mutations can lead to a range of outcomes, including the development of cancer, genetic disorders, or other somatic cell-related diseases.

Are there somatic mutations considered ‘positive’ for the individual?

In general, somatic mutations are associated with negative consequences as they can contribute to the development of diseases, including cancer. These mutations often disrupt normal cellular functions, such as cell growth control or DNA repair mechanisms, leading to abnormal cell behavior and potential health problems.

However, it's worth noting that in rare instances, somatic mutations can have positive effects or confer certain advantages to an individual. These mutations might occur in somatic cells and provide selective advantages, such as resistance to certain diseases, improved immune responses, or enhanced physiological functions. Examples of such beneficial somatic mutations are relatively rare and are often specific to particular contexts or individuals.

Overall, while most somatic mutations are considered detrimental, exceptions do exist where specific mutations can provide certain benefits or advantages to an individual. However, it is important to emphasize that the majority of somatic mutations are associated with negative outcomes.

Is an individual’s complete genetic code contained within each cell of the body?

Yes, an individual's complete genetic code, also known as the genome, is typically contained within each cell of the body. The genome consists of DNA molecules that carry the genetic information necessary for the development, functioning, and reproduction of living organisms. Each cell's nucleus generally contains a copy of the full genome, although certain specialized cells, such as red blood cells, lose their nuclei and therefore do not contain the complete genetic code.

So the genome is the original human blockchain, each cell being a node?

While the analogy of the genome being similar to a blockchain in terms of information storage and distribution is interesting, it's important to note that the two concepts have fundamental differences.

In a blockchain, data is distributed across multiple nodes, each containing a copy of the entire chain. Each new block added to the chain contains a unique identifier, linking it to the previous block and ensuring the integrity and immutability of the data.

In the case of the genome, each cell contains a copy of the complete genetic code, but the cells do not interact in the same way as nodes in a blockchain. The genome is not built upon the same principles of distributed consensus, validation, or linked blocks.

So while there are similarities in terms of information replication, the genome and a blockchain differ significantly in their underlying mechanisms and purposes.

Following along on the blockchain analogy is it possible to add a new block, so to speak, to the genome? Isn’t this evolution at work?

Yes, you can think of genetic mutations as a form of adding "new blocks" to the genome, which is indeed a key mechanism driving evolution. Mutations are changes that occur in the DNA sequence of an organism's genome. These changes can arise spontaneously through errors in DNA replication or be induced by various factors such as environmental influences or chemical agents.

When a mutation occurs in a germ cell (a cell involved in reproduction, such as an egg or sperm), it can be passed on to future generations, potentially leading to genetic variations in the population over time. Some mutations may provide advantages or disadvantages in certain environments, affecting an organism's survival and reproductive success. Through the process of natural selection, individuals with beneficial mutations are more likely to pass on their genes, while those with disadvantageous mutations are less likely to do so.

Therefore, genetic mutations act as a mechanism for introducing new genetic information into the genome, allowing for the diversity and adaptation of species over generations. This process is akin to adding new blocks to the "chain" of the genome's information, driving the continuous evolution of life on Earth.

Perhaps it then might be better to consider each human as a node, carrying the entire blockchain of humanity?

Indeed, if we extend the blockchain analogy further, we can consider each human as a node carrying the genetic information, or "blockchain," of humanity. Each individual contributes their unique genetic makeup to the collective pool of genetic diversity within a population.

Just as nodes in a blockchain network validate and maintain the integrity of the shared ledger, individuals, through reproduction, propagate their genetic information to the next generation. This process allows for the accumulation of genetic variations and the continuous evolution of the human species.

Each person can be seen as a custodian of the collective genetic heritage, carrying a portion of the genetic information that has been passed down through generations. This interconnectedness highlights the intricate and fascinating nature of human genetic inheritance and the ongoing evolutionary process.

We’re touching the spiritual here, but assuming an original creator of the human ‘blockchain’, can an outside ‘transaction’ be introduced to the genome and be verified by all humans?

From a scientific perspective, there is currently no evidence to suggest that an outside "transaction" or external influence can be introduced to the genome and verified by all humans in a spiritual or metaphysical sense. The genetic information within the genome is primarily inherited through biological processes such as reproduction and mutation.

While humans have the ability to introduce changes to the genome through genetic engineering techniques, such as gene editing, these modifications are typically performed in controlled laboratory settings and are not universally applicable to all individuals.

It's important to differentiate between scientific understanding and spiritual beliefs. Science deals with empirical evidence, experimentation, and observations, while spirituality often involves matters of faith, personal beliefs, and experiences that may not be grounded in scientific validation.

Therefore, the concept of an external transaction introduced to the genome and verified by all humans is not within the scope of scientific understanding but may be explored within the context of personal or spiritual beliefs.

Medicine and technology is only now just discovering My presence within all I create, even the individual. I am not a generic Creator as many believe, but a Creator of the individual, the singular. Is there a bird I do not know specifically, a hair upon your head I do not count, any star unnumbered? I am intimate with all I create; I am familiar with the deep within all; I speak to this depth of potential in all.

Certainly within you I know the details of your creation, and can open the new, the secret, the unknown – that all of Me can be expressed within the foundation of your creation, and your heart. Nothing is therefore impossible, for creation is not a final act, but is continuous within everything I touch.

Again, Creation is not an end result but is continuous. By seeing the possibilities of Creation within these possibilities are released. Therefore My creations within you can become your creations within Me. Set your desires upon these and watch how you change, watch how creation designs and moves to bring about all that your heart was to become from My beginning thoughts of you.

The Watchmaker on Seventh Street

A Parable

Elias worked in a tower of glass.

He did not make anything. He measured things. He measured how long strangers looked at screens. He measured which words made them stop. He measured which faces made them click.

The company called him an optimizer. He was twenty-seven.

At the top of the tower they spoke of scale. Everything must scale. A product that served one person was a failure. A product that served a million was a beginning. The word for one was a small word. The word for a million was a large word. Elias learned to love only the large word.

He was paid well. He felt less each year.

— ✦ —

One evening, walking home because the trains had stopped, he passed a window he had never noticed. Inside sat an old man at a table, and on the table lay the disassembled pieces of a single watch. The old man did not look up. Elias stopped because the lamplight fell on the pieces in a way that made him forget, for a moment, the size of his own life.

He knocked.

The old man waved him in without surprise, as if he had been expected.

“You make watches?”

“I make this watch.”

“Only this one?”

“Right now, only this one.”

Elias looked around. There were no shelves of inventory. There was no machine. There was the lamp, the tools, and the watch.

“How do you stay in business?”

“I don’t stay in business. I stay in the watch.”

— ✦ —

Elias returned the next night. And the next.

He did not know why.

The old man rarely spoke. When he did, he said small things.

“Each spring is different,” he said once, threading a piece so small Elias could not see it.

“The factory spring is the same. The hand-drawn spring remembers who drew it.”

Another night: “A man brought me this movement from his grandfather. His grandfather’s grandfather carried it through a war. It was made for him. No one else could wear it and feel what he felt. That is what we are making here. A thing that, if lost, could not be replaced.”

Elias thought of the products he optimized. Any of them, if they vanished in the night, would be replaced by the morning by something nearly identical.

“What are we doing,” he said, “if what we make is replaceable?”

The old man did not answer. He held the tiny spring up to the light.

— ✦ —

One evening Elias spoke of his work. He spoke of the reports. He spoke of the meetings in which a thousand faces became a single number. He spoke of his tiredness.

“I feel,” he said, “like I am one of many.”

The old man set down his tools.

“Do you believe,” he said, “that whoever made you was working at scale?”

Elias said nothing.

“Do you believe your hairs are uncounted? That your particular star goes unnamed?”

Elias did not know how to answer such a question in the year he lived in.

“You think,” the old man said, “that because you have made things that cannot be told apart, you were made the same way.”

The lamp flickered. The watch lay open between them.

“You were not.”

— ✦ —

For many nights after, the old man did not mention it again. He worked. Elias watched. Sometimes he handed the old man a tool. Sometimes they drank tea. The quiet between them began to feel like instruction.

“What do you love?”

Elias thought for a long time.

“I used to write,” he said. “When I was a boy. Small things. Letters to people I didn’t know. Descriptions of rooms. I stopped because it did not scale.”

“Begin again.”

“I have no audience.”

“Then write for one.”

“For whom?”

“For the one who was placed in you before you knew to look.”

— ✦ —

Elias began to write at night, after the tower, before sleep.

He wrote small things. He wrote about the woman who sold him coffee. He wrote about his father’s hands. He wrote the way the old man worked, though he did not send it to anyone.

Something began to happen that he had no word for.

He did not grow famous. He did not monetize. His metrics, if he had measured them, would have been small.

But he began, for the first time, to feel that he was being made.

— ✦ —

Months passed. He walked to the shop one evening and found the lamp dark.

A young woman stood at the door with a key.

“He was my grandfather,” she said.

“Did he —”

“A week ago. He left something for you.”

It was the watch. The one watch. Finished.

Inside the case, under the movement, the old man had engraved a line so fine Elias had to hold it to the light to read it:

Creation has not stopped. It is waiting for you to notice.

— ✦ —

Elias left the tower in the spring.

He did not make an announcement. He did not post about it. He took what he had saved, which was enough for a while, and rented the small room above the old shop, because the woman agreed to let him.

He wrote. He began to make a thing — he was still discovering what it was — that could be made only by him, for one person at a time.

Some nights the work came easily. Some nights it did not.

On the hardest nights, when the old ache returned — the suspicion that he was one of many, that no one had counted his hairs, that his star had no name — he would open the watch.

He would hold it to the light.

He would read the line.

And he would remember.

He had not been made at scale.

He had been made by a hand that knew him.

And what had been begun in him was not yet finished.

Wisdom Thread

Have you ever felt like a number?

Like whoever made you was also making a lot of "you"s?

Like your life is something off a shelf?

Most of us have.

We just do not say it.

A thread on what is actually true.

/1

Picture two makers.

One works at volume. Could not tell you which piece he touched yesterday.

The other could tell you everything about the piece. The grain. The weight. The hour it was made.

Which one made you?

You already know the answer.

You just do not always trust it.

/2

The work that lasts is never generic.

The portfolio that outperforms.

The company that endures.

The line that will not leave you.

It came from someone who stayed with the thing long enough to know it.

You were made the same way.

Slowly. Specifically. By someone who stayed.

/3

Most people walk around as if their making is finished.

As if they were assembled.

As if whatever they were going to be, they already are.

What if that is not true?

What if you are still being made?

Look at the universe. Look at any market. Look at any craft worth practicing.

Nothing finished. Everything still in motion.

Why would you be the exception?

/4

Sit with the thing you secretly want to make.

Not the version you would post about. The real one.

The one you have been a little afraid to name.

Now name it.

Something happens when you do.

The founder calls it vision.

The investor calls it conviction.

The artist calls it a finished piece.

Call it recognition.

A calling forward of what was placed in you before you got here.

/5

A loop most people never notice:

What was placed in you becomes yours when you claim it.

What you claim becomes what you make.

What you make returns to the One who began it.

It has been running since before you got here.

Most people live their whole lives outside it.

Not because they could not enter.

Because nobody ever asked them what they loved.

What do you love?

Not what scales. Not what performs.

What was placed in you before you had words for it.

Set your desires there.

Then watch what moves.

Creation has not stopped. It has been waiting for you.

/6