Summary: It has been 75 years since Erwin Schrödinger exposed the pseudoscientific nonsense of mutation-driven evolution in the lecture series that was published as What is Life? (1944)
The mental health of so-called science journalists must be addressed. Many of them seem to be pathological liars or, at best biologically uninformed science idiots who cannot link physics and chemistry from molecular epigenetics to all energy-dependent biodiversity on Earth.
The Biggest Myth In Quantum Physics by Ethan Siegel
Take ourselves out of it, and all we have are the equations, the results, and the answers that the physical Universe gives. Physics cannot answer questions about “why” the Universe works the way it does; it can only explain how it works at all. If you’re interested in the fundamental nature of reality, ask the Universe questions about itself, and when it tells you its secrets, listen. Anything else that you layer atop it was put there by you, not by the Universe. Avoid that temptation, and you’ll never fall for the greatest myth about quantum physics: that it needs an interpretation at all.
The claim that quantum physics does not require a meaningful approach to explaining how energy is linked to all biodiversity in the context of interpretation of facts is ridiculous. Astrophysicist and author Ethan Siegel is the founder and primary writer of the blog “Starts With A Bang!” His books include Treknology and Beyond The Galaxy, Simply put, he is a biologically uniformed science idiot, like others who have failed to link their ridiculous theories to all biodiversity on Earth.
See for comparison: Refined control of cell stemness allowed animal evolution in the oxic realm
Just the presence of free oxygen is the result of some microbes finding a way of using sunlight to get energy. This was also a biological event.
The difference between how animals diversified and why they diversified is perfectly clear to all serious scientists. Energy is required!
McEwen et al (1964) linked the biological event from the creation of ATP to the creation of RNA and the creation of all biophysically constrained biodiversity. All other serious scientists have since followed his lead. Dobzhansky (1964) suggested that would happen.
The notion has gained some currency that the only worthwhile biology is molecular biology. All else is “bird watching” or “butterfly collecting.” Bird watching and butterfly collecting are occupations manifestly unworthy of serious scientists! I have heard a man whose official title happens to be Professor of Zoology declare to an assembly of his colleagues that “a good man cannot teach zoology. A good man can teach, of course, only molecular biology.
Such pronunciamentos can be dismissed as merely ridiculous. They are, however, caricatures of opinions entertained by some intelligent and reasonable people, whose views deserve an honest and careful consideration and analysis. Science must cope with new problems that arise and devise new approaches to old problems. Some lines of research become less profitable and less exciting and others more so.
The claims made in the fake news about Donald Trump’s mental state can now be linked to the mental heath of his antagonists who have never seen Dozhansky’s “light of evolution.”
For example, the so-called alpha chains of hemoglobin have identical sequences of amino acids in man and the chimpanzee, but they differ in a single amino acid (out of 141) in the gorilla (p. 127).”
The anti-entropic virucidal effect of sunlight was linked from ecological variation to ecological adaption in all living genera via the pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction in soil bacteria in: What is Life? (1944)
Indeed, in the case of higher animals we know the kind of orderliness they feed upon well enough, viz. the extremely well-ordered state of matter in more or less complicated organic compounds, which serve them as foodstuffs. After utilizing it they return it in a very much degraded form -not entirely degraded, however, for plants can still make use of it. (These, of course, have their most power supply of ‘negative entropy’ the sunlight.)
Seventy-four years later we have this example of human idiocy: Transposon-derived small RNAs triggered by miR845 mediate genome dosage response in Arabidopsis
Today, a team of geneticists reveals a remarkable mechanism that enables plants to count their chromosomes, solving a century-old mystery.
Molecular mechanisms are energy-dependent. That’s no mystery. See: How an RNA gene silences a whole chromosome (2015)
Most science journalists have refused to inform themselves. They have not linked sunlight on contact with water to all energy-dependent biodiversity via the physiology of reproduction. For example, John Hewitt wrote:
If anything we know the Sky Fathers totally forgot about selenium during most of the design phase and then had to write him in at the end as a walk-on.
I was surprised by his sarcastic attack on religion and wrote:
Let’s not do this. See instead: A third of Americans don’t believe in evolution
Those who do not believe in evolution understand that energy-dependent RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions must be linked from the physiology of reproduction to chromosomal rearrangements that biophysically constrain viral latency. If you can place your claim about selenium into the context of protection of all life on Earth from the virus-driven degradation of messenger RNA, we could discuss your claim. What is it?
John Hewitt wrote:
Sky Daddy likes cranberries so much he gave them sequence-level machinery for producing selenocysteine in their mitochondrial genome
I could not get him to make sense. I wrote:
This is the type of cryptic sarcastic claim that kills people. Thousands of them. Quit playing your silly games. Who are you calling “Sky Daddy?” Sequence-level molecular machinery does not exist outside the context of the creation of the sun’s anti-entropic virucidal energy.
For comparison, Roger M. Pearlman wrote:
name one person you know that can explain Neo-Darwinian Theory (NDT) so it adds up, and how you know it adds up otherwise don’t knock the NDT adherents here as they are equally inept at making NDT add up as are the leading NDT scientists
How can anyone who wants to discuss NDT not know about this published work from 1973? Nothing in Biology Makes Any Sense Except in the Light of Evolution
… the so-called alpha chains of hemoglobin have identical sequences of amino acids in man and the chimpanzee, but they differ in a single amino acid (out of 141) in the gorilla.
The differences in the amino acid sequences are Koonin’s proof of evolution. See: A universal trend of amino acid gain and loss in protein evolution
Amino acid composition of proteins varies substantially between taxa and, thus, can evolve.
If the differences in the amino acid sequences are energy-dependent and RNA-mediated, NDT is the most ridiculous example of pseudoscientific nonsense that has every been touted by people who claim to be more intelligent than their primate ancestors.
Proof of that fact was published as: Modern diversification of the amino acid repertoire driven by oxygen
..we demonstrate an immediate survival benefit conferred by the enhanced redox reactivity of the modern amino acids tyrosine and tryptophan in oxidatively stressed cells. Our data indicate that in demanding building blocks with more versatile redox chemistry, biospheric molecular oxygen triggered the selective fixation of the last amino acids in the genetic code. Thus, functional rather than structural amino acid properties were decisive during the finalization of the universal genetic code.
Selective fixation of amino acid substitutions in organized genomes is energy-dependent and controlled by the physiology of reproduction.
That fact was reported as: Quantum Chemistry Solves The Question of Why Life Needs So Many Amino Acids
If you were representing the amino acids as circles, they could be drawn as multiple concentric circles representing differing energy levels, rather than one single circle of the same chemical hardness and energy level – kind of like in the photo below.
Few people would make the connection from the amino acids as circles representing different energy levels to the claim that de Vries (1902) made when he invented the term mutation.
See: What is Life? (1944)
But about forty years ago the Dutchman de Vries discovered that in the offspring even of thoroughly pure-bred stocks, a very small number of individuals, say two or three in tens of thousands, turn up with small but ‘jump-like’ changes, the expression ‘jump-like’ not meaning that the change is so very considerable, but that there is a discontinuity inasmuch as there are no intermediate forms between the unchanged and the few changed. De Vries called that a mutation. The significant fact is the discontinuity. It reminds a physicist of quantum theory -no intermediate energies occurring between two neighbouring energy levels. He would be inclined to call de Vries’s mutation theory, figuratively, the quantum theory of biology. We shall see later that this is much more than figurative. The mutations are actually due to quantum jumps in the gene molecule. But quantum theory was but two years old when de Vries first published his discovery, in 1902. Small wonder that it took another generation to discover the intimate connection!
It has been 75 years since Erwin Schrödinger exposed the pseudoscientific nonsense of mutation-driven evolution in the lecture series that was published as What is Life? (1944)
In the 1991 reprint edition, a forward by Roger Penrose who has co-authored with George F.R. Ellis, Stephen Hawking, Stuart Hameroff and others wrote:
How often do we still hear that quantum effects can have little relevance in the study of biology, or even that we eat food in order to gain energy?
It is worth repeating the claim the food energy is required to link quantum physics from quantum chemistry to quantum biology and quantum souls until all pseudoscientists lean the difference between a mutation and an amino acid substitution. Until then, the mental health problem at the highest level will be maintained at the highest level by the highest level of human idiocy every known to have eliminated common sense from consideration in the context of biologically based cause and effect.
For example, Darwin’s claims were based on “conditions of life” that required all organisms to find food and reproduce. Nothing was known about mutations, and even then Darwin could not possibly have been foolish enough to put them first in the context of natural selection for mutation-driven pathology.
Visual system development is light-experience dependent, which strongly implicates epigenetic mechanisms in light-regulated maturation. Among many epigenetic processes, genomic imprinting is an epigenetic mechanism….
…through which monoallelic gene expression occurs in a parent-of-origin-specific manner.
This explains why John Hewitt claims I’m providing BS. He is a biologically uninformed science journalist who does not understand the facts about light energy-dependent changes in organized genomes.
Any journalist who publishes anything like The vibrational theory of olfaction for the win should prepare to defend his claims in the context of serious scientists who know how energy must be linked to the vibrations and how the vibrations link quantum physics from quantum chemistry to quantum souls via the physiology of pheromone-controlled reproduction and fixation of RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions.