Biology Developments

By: James V. Kohl | Published on: July 9, 2014

No one has commented on my posts to the “Biology Developments” Facebook page despite the clear indications that theories proposed by population geneticists are rapidly falling out of favor as the theories are replaced with facts about biologically based cause and effect.
Personally, I think my posts tend to scare some researchers who had hoped they could continue to tout their belief in the theory they were taught to believe in, as if experimental evidence in the context of biology developments had ever supported it.
I’m linking to some of the information in the posts just to show how quiet the group is. Like other groups, there seems to be no participants willing to discuss new research results, like these:

Conserved microRNA editing in mammalian evolution, development and disease

Excerpt: “…site-specific miRNA editing is an evolutionarily conserved mechanism, which increases the functional diversity of mammalian miRNA transcriptomes.”
Excerpt 2): “…miRNA editing is an integral and evolutionarily stable feature of mammalian transcriptomes.”
My comment: It’s time for social scientists and serious scientists alike to admit that site-specific miRNA editing is nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled. Biological facts continue to refute the pseudoscientific nonsense of mutation-initiated natural selection and evolved biodiversity.

From Kohl (2013) “In flies, ecological and social niche construction can be linked to molecular-level cause and effect at the cellular and organismal levels via nutrient-dependent changes in mitochondrial tRNA and a nuclear-encoded tRNA synthetase. The enzyme enables attachment of an appropriate amino acid…”

Diet in mammals is complex

Journal article excerpt: “…continuing to work instead with untested dietary classifications would generate unstandardized results and thereby prevent synergy between intellectually overlapping ecological and palaeoecological research programmes.”
My comment: “Nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled ecological adaptations: from atoms to ecosystems” is the requested but rejected review of nutritional epigenetics that refutes neo-Darwinian theories and links the pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction to the synergy that is required to integrate intellectually overlapping ecological and palaeoecological research programmes.

Those who examine only nutrition or only reproduction may never realize that ecological variation and nutrient-dependent amino acid substitutions enable the pheromone-controlled physiology of species-specific reproduction, which is manifested in the morphological and behavioral phenotypes of species from microbes to man. Many social scientists, for example, still think in terms of mutation-initiated natural selection instead of natural selection for nutrients. That explains why social scientists believe in biologically implausible theories that were invented by population geneticists. They missed Darwin’s cautions about ‘conditions of life’ that must be considered before thoughts about natural selection are given a higher priority than what an organism finds to eat, and how reproduction is controlled.

Multiple evidence strands suggest that there may be as few as 19 000 human protein-coding genes.

Excerpt: “There are genes that do not fit into the conventional coding/non-coding narrative in the non-coding set. Several genes are annotated as potentially non-functional but may actually be functional under certain conditions.” My comment: If nutrient-stress and social stress did not cause non-functional genes to become functional, ecological variation could not result in ecological adaptations via nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled amino acid substitutions that are the epigenetically effected determinants of cell type differentiation in all individuals of all species.

Evolution of life’s operating system revealed in detail

My comment:  There appears to be no mention of the biophysical constraints that prevent perturbed protein folding from resulting in the evolution of biodiversity. However, it also appears that my atoms to ecosystems model of how ecological variation results in ecological adaptations via conserved molecular mechanisms in species from microbes to man also is ignored.
Thus, we have yet another representation of how something is somehow linked to evolution without mention of what’s knowns about physics, chemistry, or molecular biology.Evolution — at the atomic level of resolution — just happens.

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Want more on the same topic?

Swipe/Drag Left and Right To Browse Related Posts: