Teaching the biologically uninformed

By: James V. Kohl | Published on: December 7, 2015

Stark Reality

by : Computer consultant, science writer, avid reader, martial arts enthusiast. My favorite discussion topics are cognitive neuroscience, psychology, biology, problem solving, human performance, and Microsoft SharePoint technologies.

Fatness and Obesity: Framing the Problem

Excerpt:

…we have to understand what about our lives is most mismatched with our ability to regulate our energy storage. Is it the sorts of things we are eating? The activities we engage in? The nutritional quality available to us? The amount of food available to us? The way food is marketed to us? The level of stress in our daily lives? The amount of sleep we get? The kinds of bacteria that live in our body?

My comment: All eight questions have obvious answers that are based on what is known to serious scientists.
Excerpt:

These ideas have all been proposed and any and all of them (and more) can be argued to be plausible factors. I want to insert a caution here about being too confident that we have identified the problem by identifying any of these particular aspects of our environment. It seems to me that sort of thinking tends to lead to ineffectively narrow strategies.

My comment: It seems to me that you are ignoring the “YES” answers of all serious scientists to the questions about energy that you just echoed.
See for comparison: Nothing in Biology Makes Any Sense Except in the Light of Evolution

Excerpt:

Cytochrome C is an enzyme that plays an important role in the metabolism of aerobic cells. It is found in the most diverse organisms, from man to molds. E. Margoliash, W. M. Fitch, and others have compared the amino acid sequences in cytochrome C in different branches of the living world. Most significant similarities as well as differences have been brought to light. The cytochrome C of different orders of mammals and birds differ in 2 to 17 amino acids, classes of vertebrates in 7 to 38, and vertebrates and insects in 23 to 41; and animals differ from yeasts and molds in 56 to 72 amino acids. Fitch and Margoliash prefer to express their findings in what are called “minimal mutational distances.” It has been mentioned above that different amino acids are coded by different triplets of nucleotides in DNA of the genes; this code is now known.

My comment: There is one model that links what others may prefer to call “minimal mutational distances” from ecological variation to ecological adaptations. In my model, I call amino acid substitutions the nutrient energy-dependent links from alternative splicings of pre-mRNAs to biophysically constrained protein folding chemistry. I do not refer to any “minimal mutational distances” because mutations are not linked to increasing organismal complexity. Amino acid substitutions link RNA-mediated events to cell type differentiation in all cell types of all living genera.
See also:The splice of life: Proteins cooperate to regulate gene splicing (2012)
See:  Un-junking junk DNA (2013)
Excerpt:

…sequencing of other, non-human, genomes has allowed scientists to delineate the sequences in the genome that are remarkably preserved across hundreds of millions of years of evolution. It is widely accepted that this evidence of evolutionary constraint implies that, even without coding for protein, certain segments of the genome are vital for life and development.

See: Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model
My comment: If you need more examples of biologically-based cause and effect, see: Viral Genome Junk Is Bunk
Excerpt:

…the evidence mentioned above indicates that viruses likely arose from their hosts and not the other way around.

My comment: The evidence also indicates that virus-perturbed protein folding is the source of all pathology. Neo-Darwinian theorists attribute the creation of new species and virus-perturbed protein folding to the same molecular mechanisms because they do not know how biophysically constrained RNA-mediated cell type differentiation occurs. They do not want to be portrayed as if they are biologically uninformed science idiots, so they invent theories that sound plausible to others who are biologically uninformed and teach them to become science idiots.
For comparison, see: Nucleotide Excision Repair of the DNA
My comment: This is the best accurate representation of links from physics to chemistry and conserved molecular mechanisms of cell type differentiation that I have seen. Has anyone else linked UV light to nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated DNA damage repair in a published work that can be understood by researchers from different disciplines?
See also: A two-faced protein enables RNA-mediated DNA repair
and A two-faced protein enables RNA-mediated DNA repair (2)
 


Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Want more on the same topic?

Swipe/Drag Left and Right To Browse Related Posts: