The Triune Brain

ianmc38

I'm totally ignorant when it comes to all things anatomical, so any help would be much appreciated.

A few questions:

1. What do leading neuroscientists think of Macleans triune brain model? Has it been refuted at all? I can't seem to find any good links that discuss it.

2. One of my friends is obsessed with aliens and insists that junk DNA is a result of ET interference thousands of years ago. I've read a few articles regarding this online as well. He's asked me to give him proof that it isn't alien DNA. I think the burden of proof lies with him as what he says contradicts all conventional knowledge. Is the only argument for this to use the Dawkins teapot analogy or is there any evidence that i can reference?

Thanks.

John

ianmc38 wrote:

1. What do leading neuroscientists think of Macleans triune brain model? Has it been refuted at all? I can't seem to find any good links that discuss it.

I thought I had never heard of this but I've just never heard of the name. I don't know much about what MacLean has to say (or even who he is) but the different parts of the brain are evolutionarily different, i.e. the brain stem is the oldest part and would be similar to the brains of "primitive" creatures (I don't like the terms "primitive" and "lower" and "higher" organisms, everything has had the same number of years evolving on earth!) and the main life support functions of the brain are in the brain stem. Later in evolution things like the cortex and the subcortical regions of the brain would have come into being. However none of this is really that important except in studying the evolution of the brain. All parts of the brain involved in a particular behaviour or function tend to be connected to each other, i.e. movement requires multiple areas of cortex, subcortical areas, brainstem and cerebellum. Some things like speech in humans rely more on newer parts of the brain as they have only come about thanks to these parts of the brain coming into existence. I don't know if I've answered your question as I think I'm talking myself into circles...

2. One of my friends is obsessed with aliens and insists that junk DNA is a result of ET interference thousands of years ago. I've read a few articles regarding this online as well. He's asked me to give him proof that it isn't alien DNA. I think the burden of proof lies with him as what he says contradicts all conventional knowledge. Is the only argument for this to use the Dawkins teapot analogy or is there any evidence that i can reference?

ianmc38

Basically, he's saying "prove that our DNA doesnt come from aliens" (Junk DNA). I say there's no need for me to. The burden of proof lies with you...

The Dawkins teapot analogy is used regarding the existence of a god. He says to prove that there isnt a teapot orbitting around the sun. Obviously we know there isn't one, but we cant prove it...

Robbiethe3rd

Ugh, this wont help your friend but there is a theory that life originated from outerpasce. There is more organic matter (by percentage) in outerspace surrounding our planet than there is on the earth. Almost all organic matter on earth lies on the surface, (the very surface). So it is suspected that this matter may originate from matter in space surrouding the planet precipitating gradually onto the planet.
Life may have originated in outer space (some speculate on a meteor or something) and it is only on earth that it was given the opportunity to evolve to what it is today.
so I dont know about aliens but... outerspace maybe.

Also Im sure you may have heard the theory that viruses may have originate from outer space too! It is thought that they are involved in the evolutionary process as they have interactions with DNA. This would then lead to the accumulation of junk DNA. By this logic, if true, junk DNA could indeed be alien...

But I dont really think so!!!