Talk:The Spirit Science
Ripping off Extra Credits
For basically anybody who's seen his terrible work, it is basically Extra Credits if they somehow went so far into the conspiracy bucket that it was the bucket. Is it worth mentioning here? Zero (talk - contributions) 09:56, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
While there are 64 possible ways to have a sequence of 3 nucleotides (A, C, T, and G being 4 in number, and 4x4x4 being 64) they only code for 20 different amino acids. This means (fairly obviously) that some amino acids are each represented by several different codons. If you add stop and start, perhaps that's where the prolific stoner gets 22 from? While the number is technically 64, most references on the subject will mention both numbers, 64, and the number of amino acids the code can represent.
I've rearranged most of the page, since it was quite repetitive and the "Conflicts with science" section was just non-sense. The contents of the "Beliefs" section haven't been deleted, but moved into a subsection of "Themes" named "History". --Ander Garin (talk) 19:00, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
References clean-up and rearrangement
When I have time, I'll put all the references under the same format (author(s), name/video, site/journal, date) and fuse the ones that are different but refer to the same thing into one (using "ref name="). Don't worry if a reference disappears, it'll be temporal. By the way, don't you think that suggesting that SS is a "passive-aggressive cult" is a little bit excessive? I've found no accounts of anyone considering it that so far. If no, we should remove from its definition, because it's unfair. If some people indeed consider it as such, it'd be helpful to add a header discussing its status as a cult.--Jagoe (talk) 17:18, 22 April 2017 (UTC)