Conclusion: Serious scientists can explain every aspect of energy-dependent biophysically constrained viral latency in the context of details about these pathways and everything that links changes from electrons to ecosystems in all living genera. Why are the serious scientists still challenged by “…the tendency of academia to reject any academic-like work from outside academia?” What aspect of the academic contribution that could lead to the cure for all pathology do biologically uninformed academics want to continue to reject and attack?
The “Cassandra syndrome” theme prevails throughout the history of all serious scientists. They are cursed with being able to predict the future because they are always disbelieved.
The authors claim that differential effects of m6A may depend on interactions between microRNAs and cis-acting elements that are present on the RNA molecule.
Simply put, the interactions are energy-dependent and RNA-mediated. Pseudoscientists do not know where the energy came from that creates new cells and they do not know what kills the new cells.
In a new opinion paper, published online Nov. 14 in the journal Trends in Cognitive Sciences, researchers proposed that this swelling and shrinking of the brain is a Darwinian process.
The claim that this is a Darwinian process comes from: Expansion and Renormalization of Human Brain Structure During Skill Acquisition
MRIs use complex physics to peer through the walls of the skull into the brain.
Jaak Panksepp’s group won the 2002 award that my group won in 2001 for publication of Human pheromones: integrating neuroendocrinology and ethology. See for comparison:
If you don’t understand the foundational level, then you can do brain imaging until you’re blue in the face, but you still will not understand the process at a deep causal level. — Dr. Jaak Panksepp, Author of Affective Neuroscience: The Foundations of Human and Animal Emotions
See the missing foundational level extended from a Darwinian process of swelling and shrinking of the brain to claims about human evolution.
From the Human Ethology Yahoo Group moderated by Jay Feierman.
…this process was not a straightforward, smooth one – instead, it seems to have been punctuated, with different evolutionary patterns in different geographical regions.
More than 1300 hemoglobin variants attest to the obvious fact that evolutionary theorists cannot recognize any pattern that links food energy from what humans eat to the biophysically constrained pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction. They ignore every aspect of food energy-dependent RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions, which protect all organized genomes from the virus-driven degradation of messenger RNA. The degradation of messenger RNA links mutations to all pathology.
See for examples of food energy-dependent pathology prevention: HbVar: A Database of Human Hemoglobin Variants and Thalassemias
To place food energy-dependent prevention of pathology into the perspective of difference in primates, see:
The fact that gene splicing is linked to a single amino acid that differentiates the cell types of 2 primate species from the gorilla, led me to ask: What do other people do when they learn that everything they were taught to believe about evolution is a lie?
I placed the question to the Neuroscience FB group into this context: The Academic Ape: Instinctive aggression and boundary enforcing behaviour in academia
The Cassandra Effect describes the tendency of academia to reject any academic-like work from outside academia and that the more “academic” the contribution, the more strongly it is rejected and attacked.
This is the accurate representation of food energy-dependent pheromone-controlled learning and memory that has consistently been attacked or ignored since the time we published our 1996 Hormones and Behavior review. In our section on molecular epigenetics, we wrote:
Yet another kind of epigenetic imprinting occurs in species as diverse as yeast, Drosophila, mice, and humans and is based upon small DNA-binding proteins called “chromo domain” proteins, e.g., polycomb. These proteins affect chromatin structure, often in telomeric regions, and thereby affect transcription and silencing of various genes (Saunders, Chue, Goebl, Craig, Clark, Powers, Eissenberg, Elgin, Rothfield, and Earnshaw, 1993; Singh, Miller, Pearce, Kothary, Burton, Paro, James, and Gaunt, 1991; Trofatter, Long, Murrell, Stotler, Gusella, and Buckler, 1995). Small intranuclear proteins also participate in generating alternative splicing techniques of pre-mRNA and, by this mechanism, contribute to….
Alternative splicing techniques of pre-mRNA have since been linked to every aspect of cell type differentiation in all individuals of all species. The pre-mRNAs are called microRNAs and detailed examples of how food energy-dependent changes in the microRNA/messenger RNA balance can be linked to what has been known about RNA-mediated cell type differentiation to serious scientists. For example, serious scientists know that all changes in the microRNA/messenger RNA balance are energy-dependent. No changes are random. All changes are biophysically constrained. The changes constrain viral latency. That fact has been established in more than 67,000 indexed published works.
See: microRNA Items: 1 to 20 of 67307
“Variation is not nutrient availability and the something that is doing the selecting is not the individual organism. A feature of an educated person is to realize what they do not know. Sadly, you don’t know that you have an incorrect understanding [of] Darwinian biological evolution.”
See for comparison: Food derived microRNAs
The microRNA gene targets, gene ontology, annotations and pathways were identified through various bioinformatics tools. Additionally, the pathways were mostly found common to “ubiquitin mediated proteolysis”, “cytokine signaling”, “maintenance of barrier function/cell junctions”, JAK/STAT pathway” “Toll-like receptor signaling”, “Wnt-signaling”, “adhesion molecules”, “apoptosis”, “endocytosis”, “vesicle mediated transport” etc.
Serious scientists can explain every aspect of energy-dependent biophysically constrained viral latency in the context of details about these pathways and everything that links changes from electrons to ecosystems in all living genera. Why are the serious scientists still challenged by “…the tendency of academia to reject any academic-like work from outside academia?” What aspect of the academic contribution that could lead to the cure for all pathology do biologically uninformed academics want to continue to reject and attack?