Evolution outside the context of “the light of evolution” (2)

By: James V. Kohl | Published on: September 13, 2017

See first: Evolution outside the context of “the light of evolution”

How many proponents of Intelligent Design never learned that Darwinian evolution was based on his “conditions of life?”

ch 4 IV. Natural Selection; or the Survival of the Fittest  “IF under changing conditions of life…”

ch 5 https://www.bartleby.com/11/5002.html “…the greater variability of species having wider ranges than of those with restricted ranges, lead to the conclusion that variability is generally related to the conditions of life…”

“…we cannot tell how much to attribute to the accumulative action of natural selection, and how much to the definite action of the conditions of life.”

ch 6 https://www.bartleby.com/11/6001.html “By my theory these allied species are descended from a common parent; and during the process of modification, each has become adapted to the conditions of life…

How many biologically uninformed science idiots do not know that conditions of life are nutrient energy-dependent and controlled by the physiology of reproduction?

Intelligent Design – Science & Philosophy Discussion attempt: 


Food energy-dependent RNA-directed DNA methylation alters the shifting of membrane helices. The alterations prevent the virus-driven degradation of messenger RNA and all pathology via fixation of amino acid substitutions in organized genomes. The physiology of reproduction and pheromone-controlled chromosomal inheritance link the fixation of amino acid substitutions in all cell types of all living genera to all biodiversity.

Andréia Silva James Kohl you won the Nobel prize for refuting evolution, correct?

Yoshinori Ohsumi won last year for doing that: A protein conjugation system essential for autophagy

This [energy-dependent] conjugation can be reconstituted in vitro and depends on ATP.

Ben Feringa also won last year: Dynamic control of chirality and self-assembly of double-stranded helicates with light

Did you not get the memo? They linked the speed of light on contact with water from energy-dependent changes in chirality to all biodiversity via ATP, which is required for the creation of RNA.
The link from self-assembly to autophagy includes a light-activated endogenous substrate that links the innate immune system of all species to protection from the virus-driven degradation of messenger RNA, which links mutations to all pathology.

All serious scientists are waiting for all pseudoscientists to realize the level of ignorance they have displayed for at least the past 50 years and take responsibility for the unnecessary suffering and premature deaths their ridiculous theories have caused.

Thank God, some serious scientists have taken the lead.

See:  Use antibiotics in cell culture with caution: genome-wide identification of antibiotic-induced changes in gene expression and regulation

Pathway analyses found a significant enrichment for “xenobiotic metabolism signaling” and “PXR/RXR activation” pathways. Our H3K27ac ChIP-seq identified 9,514 peaks that are PenStrep responsive. These peaks were enriched near genes that function in cell differentiation, tRNA modification, nuclease activity and protein dephosphorylation. Our results suggest that PenStrep treatment can significantly alter gene expression and regulation in a common liver cell type such as HepG2, advocating that antibiotic treatment should be taken into account when carrying out genetic, genomic or other biological assays in cultured cells.

Reported as: Common use of antibiotics in cells grown for research could distort tests

“…we treat cells with antibiotics all the time in cell culture and nobody’s looked at how this might affect and ,” said Ahituv.

Admitting that you and your colleagues once were biologically uninformed science idiots is the first step towards recovery. The antibiotic treatment caused the constraint-breaking mutations that all serious scientists have linked to all pathology. Food energy and the pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction link biophysically constrained viral latency to healthy longevity.

The worst part of all this is that it clearly indicates Carl Woese was wrong. There is one domain of life and the virus-driven degradation of messenger RNA links the theft of quantized energy from the creation of bacteria to the creation of archaea.
Virus-driven energy theft also links the creation of humans to the creation of non-human primates via the same molecular mechanisms that link the food energy-dependent pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction in bacteria to healthy longevity in species from microbes to humans.
My antagonists will continue to hate me for revealing that fact, but it was first revealed in Biblical Genesis. If I link the virus-driven theft of quantized energy to the creation of L-forms, I may be martyred.
But wait, I already did that and so did Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:36. I’m not quoting scripture, even though it parallels facts from what some people might call the book of “nature” even though there is only one book about that. 

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

[…] See also: Evolution outside the context of “the light of evolution” (2) […]

Want more on the same topic?

Swipe/Drag Left and Right To Browse Related Posts: