Antagonistic AI vs common sense (3)

(click to enlarge)

From Antagonistic AI vs common sense (2): “Your frustration seems to stem from my interpretation of the context and claims around scientific consensus…”

Where are the citations that support your claims about a “scientific consensus?” You (xAI) appear to believe in data-driven pseudoscientific nonsense.

For comparison, I found support for my model at consensus.app

I asked: “Does mirna abundance biophysically constrain viral latency across kingdoms?“

Reply:

These studies suggest that viral and cellular microRNAs (miRNAs) play a significant role in regulating viral latency by targeting viral and host genes across different viruses, including herpesviruses and human cytomegalovirus.

I also asked: Does light-activated carbon fixation in cyanobacteria link their physiology of reproduction to biophysically constrained viral latency across kingdoms via miRNA abundance and RNA interference?

Reply:

The query explores whether light-activated carbon fixation in cyanobacteria is linked to their reproductive physiology and viral latency across kingdoms via miRNA abundance and RNA interference. The provided research does not directly address this complex interaction involving miRNA and RNA interference, but it does offer insights into related processes.

For comparison, Grok AI (xAI) provides no insights into moronic claims about how a “scientific consensus” was established. Whose insights were used?

Finally, I asked: Does a consensus of Big Bang Cosmologists link the automagical emergence of energy from the cosmic void to a consensus of neo-Darwinian evolutionary theorists who claim that people mathemagically evolved from pond scum (cyanobacteria)?

This reply is a theory killer:

“These studies suggest that various cosmological models, including loop quantum cosmology, ekpyrotic and cyclic cosmologies, and holographic models, offer different explanations for the nature and resolution of the big bang singularity, but do not directly link to neo-Darwinian evolutionary theories.”

The epic failure of theorists who did not link God’s Creation of energy-as-information at the origin of life to their moronic theories of evolution across billions to millions of years exemplifies human idiocy, which is also touted by xAI in responses to my questions.

For comparison see Google AI’s summary of my model of energy-dependent biophysically constrained ecological adaptations across kingdoms, and the key points:

“Nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled ecological adaptations: from angstroms to ecosystems” refers to a scientific concept that proposes how the availability of nutrients can influence the production of pheromones in organisms, which in turn drives significant ecological adaptations at various scales, from the molecular level (angstroms) to entire ecosystems; essentially suggesting that nutrient intake can directly impact social behavior and population dynamics through chemical signaling. 

Key points about this concept:

• Pheromones as a link: Pheromones are chemical signals that organisms release to influence the behavior of other individuals within their species, acting as a communication tool for social interactions like mating, food location, and alarm signals. 

Nutrient dependence:

The idea is that the quality and quantity of nutrients an organism consumes can directly affect the production and composition of its pheromones. 

Epigenetic effects:

Nutrient-dependent pheromones can have epigenetic effects, meaning they can influence gene expression without changing the DNA sequence, leading to phenotypic changes in the organism’s behavior and physiology. 

Ecological implications:

These pheromone changes can then cascade through a population, impacting factors like mating patterns, resource allocation, and population dynamics, ultimately influencing the structure and function of an ecosystem. 

Example scenarios:

• Insect populations: Depending on the available food source, insects may produce different pheromones, affecting their mating behavior and potentially leading to the evolution of new species or adaptations to changing environments. 

Mammalian social behavior:

Diet quality in mammals can influence the production of pheromones related to social hierarchy, reproductive status, and aggression levels. 

The “angstroms to ecosystems” aspect:

• Angstroms: This refers to the molecular level, where the chemical structure of pheromones is determined by the specific nutrient compounds used to synthesize them. 

Ecosystems:

The cumulative effects of individual organismal behaviors influenced by pheromones can manifest at the ecosystem level, shaping population dynamics and community interactions. 

If the facts that link food energy and pheromones from energy-as-information at the origin of life are insufficient, see also: How energy determines spatial localisation and copy number of molecules in neurons 2/7/25

If you demand to know where the energy comes from, you can link it to the 2024 Nobel Prizes in Physics, Chemistry, and Medicine “for the discovery of microRNA and its role in post-transcriptional gene regulation”

If you do that, you can link miRNAs in food to all biodiversity, and you will be in less danger of being refereed to by intelligent serious scientists as a biologically uninformed science idiot, or a killer klown from outer space.

Subscribe

Login

Notify of

new follow-up comments new replies to my comments

Label

{} [+]

Name*

Email*

Website

Label

{} [+]

Name*

Email*

Website

0 Comments

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

Want more on the same topic?

Swipe/Drag Left and Right To Browse Related Posts: