See also: Did “Nature” kill Steve Jobs?
In my model of biophysically constrained energy-dependent protein folding chemistry and RNA-mediated cell type differentiation, the nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction links the innate immune system to supercoiled DNA, which protects all organized genomes from virus-driven entropy.
For comparison to my model, see: Evolution 2016 Videos (Indexed)
See also for comparison: Viruses Have Guided the Path of Human Evolution
Whenever a viral epidemic tears through a community, there are those lucky enough to possess mutations rendering them immune to the disease. If the epidemic is large enough, this mutation can become embedded in our genome, both because of its protective powers, and because those with it will be overrepresented in the surviving population.
My comment: No experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect has ever linked viruses from mutations to supecoiled DNA , which protects all organized genomes from virus-driven energy theft and genomic entropy. Thus, their report simply dismisses everything known about how ecological variation must be linked to energy-dependent ecological adaptation. They place everything known to serious scientists into the context of neo-Darwian theory.
No theory links energy-dependent changes from the innate immune system to healthy longevity, but facts link virus-driven energy theft to all pathology. None of the facts support claims about “…a living history of millions of years of conflict.”
These findings show the value of closely related non-human primates to study shared characteristics of close evolutionary relatives and to identify unique features of the human brain related to our cognitive abilities and susceptibility to certain diseases.
My comment: Microsoft cofounder Paul Allen is funding this research, which contributed to the death of Steve Jobs from cancer. The findings show that the researchers know nothing about energy-dependent RNA-mediated protein folding chemistry or how virus-driven energy theft prevents ecological adaptations manifested in cell type differences via amino acid substitutions.
See also this attempt to discuss biologically-based cause and effect in the FB group “God in Science.”
My comment: There are far too many people who would rather you go to your grave suffering from a disease that could be prevented merely by focusing efforts on teaching more people about how energy-dependent RNA-mediated cell type differentiation occurs. They don’t want others to learn that their ignorance of biologically-based cause and effect has led to the claims of others who are Combating Evolution to Fight Disease.
If “Nature” killed Steve Jobs, nature will keep killing. If evolution killed him, evolutionary theory will keep killing others. If energy-dependent biophysically constrained RNA-mediated protein folding chemistry links the innate immune system to supercoiled DNA and all biodiversity via the physiology of reproduction, which research group will be the first to report that fact?
Who funds the researchers who are Combating Evolution to Fight Disease. at the same time pseudoscientists claim that ecological variation and ecological adaptation can be linked to virus-driven evolution? Who do pseudoscientists think they are fooling?
If materials from sites excavated long ago (e.g. Riparo Mezzena) are to be used to provide additional data on these complex phases of our evolutionary history, then it should only be done using the whole suite of state-of-the-art methods at our disposal.
My comment: The state-of-the-art methods at everyone’s disposal link energy-dependent RNA methylation to all biodiversity. All state-of-the-art methods at your disposal link virus-driven energy theft to all pathology via what is known to serious scientists about biophysically constrained protein folding chemistry and the physiology of reproduction.
What is currently known about the epigenetics of gene expression has replaced ridiculous theories that were based on pseudoscientific nonsense. For example, no serious scientist believes that de Vries 1902 definition of “mutation” can be linked to assumptions about how many accumulated mutations it might take to cause one species to evolve into another.
However, if pseudoscientists can convince you that viruses and all cell types have some form of an innate immune system, they may also convince you to use their big pharma-driven treatments as likely cures for virus-driven pathology.
“MIMIVIRE is not analogous to the CRISPR-Cas system, does not function via a nucleic acid recognition system, and is unlikely to possess all the attributes of a bona fide adaptive immune system,” Claverie and Abergel wrote in their paper.
My comment: The problem for neo-Darwinists is the fact that RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions have already been linked to virulence by one substitution in the influenza virus, and energy dependent ecological adaptation has been linked to substitutions in all hosts.
The failed attempt to portray viruses in viruses as if they could replicate outside the context of energy-dependent links from angstroms to ecosystems may be one of the final failures of theorists who do not recognize or do not acknowledge any aspect of how cell type differentiation occurs.
If viruses do not have an innate immune system for comparison to all cell types in all cells of all living genera, these reported results attest to the claims of young earth creationists and Paul M. Lieberman, who wrote:
“…viral latency is responsible for life-long pathogenesis and mortality risk…” — Epigenetics and Genetics of Viral Latency
See also: Viral Genome Junk Is Bunk
…the evidence mentioned above indicates that viruses likely arose from their hosts and not the other way around. As molecular biologist and biochemist Peter Borger notes, “The most parsimonious answer is: the RNA viruses got their genes from their hosts.”6″