See first: Natural selection for adaptation (4)

If you have not yet linked God’s Creation of energy-as-information from the pH-dependent physiology of reproduction to biophysically constrained viral latency and all phenotypes, start with Regulation of MicroRNAs 8/26/21.

For comparison, Charles Darwin invented his theory based on no ability to observe biophysically constrained energy-dependent top-down causation at the molecular level.

He bred pigeons, which led him to focus on morphology and link the food that finches ate to beak morphology because nothing was known about genes. To his credit, however, he started with food energy-dependent “conditions of life,” the physiology of reproduction,  and ecological adaptations in publication of Origin of Species (1859).


Natural Selection; or the Survival of the Fittest Difficulties of the Theory

IF under changing conditions of life

Laws of Variation: Effects of the Increased Use and Disuse of Parts, as Controlled by Natural Selection

…variability is generally related to the conditions of life to which each species has been exposed during several successive generations.

Difficulties of the Theory: Difficulties of the Theory of Descent with Modification

…allied species are descended from a common parent; and during the process of modification, each has become adapted to the conditions of life of its own region…

An  appropriate new definition for Darwin’s “conditions of life” starts with Regulation of MicroRNAs 8/26/21.

“Biogenesis is regulated by many checkpoints at every step, primarily at the transcriptional level, in the nucleus, cytoplasm, with RNA regulation, RISC loading, miRNA strand selection, RNA methylation/uridylation, and turnover rate.”

Although he repeatedly urged others to not bastardize his theory with additions of their ridiculous opinions and mathematical models, they did it anyway.  Now, 162 years later, we see how much human idiocy the stupid bastards displayed.

See: Gene trapping reveals a new transcriptionally active genome element: the chromosome-specific clustered trap region 8/21/21

The analysis of trapped genes revealed a new genome element—the chromosome-specific clustered trap region (CSCT).

The rate of homozygotes was significantly lower than expected according to Mendel’s laws. In addition, the number of offspring obtained by mating homozygotes was significantly smaller compared to that obtained by crossing controls.

This study identifies a transcriptionally active CSCT with an important role in mouse development.

Epigenetic effects of food odors and pheromones link the chromosome-specific clustered trap region from CSCT13 to an effect on meiotic homologous recombination and biophysically constrained viral latency in the mouse to human model, first presented in 1994 as: Feromonal’nyi kontrol’ geneticheskikh protsessov: issledovaniia na domovoi myshi (Mus musculus L.) / Pheromonal regulation of genetic processes: research on the house mouse (Mus musculus L.)

A study of the influence of pheromone stressor(s) on proliferating germ and somatic cells was performed on laboratory lines of house mouse in the context of the physiological hypothesis of mutation process, proposed by M.E. Lobashev in 1947. Data from experiments are presented, and results obtained during last 10-15 years are discussed. The adaptive role of cytogenetic and other observed pheromonal effects is considered. The possible existence ofcis discussed, the search for and study of which may help in more complete understanding of the regularities of functioning of genetic material.

Spurious claims about non-homologous end-joining (3183 results) can be compared to facts about energy-dependent homologous recombination (20840 results) in the context of what is currently known about DNA repair and therapies that link it to the functional structure of supercoiled DNA at every level of investigation by intelligent serious scientists.

See for instance: A noncoding RNA modulator potentiates phenylalanine metabolism in mice, which was reported as Therapy based on functional RNA elements 8/6/21

This discovery suggests that short lncRNA fragments could overcome some of the challenges faced by other RNA therapeutic modalities.

“Long non-coding RNAs (long ncRNAs, lncRNA) are a type of RNA, defined as being transcripts with lengths exceeding 200 nucleotides that are not translated into protein.[2] This somewhat arbitrary limit distinguishes long ncRNAs from small non-coding RNAs such as microRNAs (miRNAs), small interfering RNAs (siRNAs)…”

Pretending to not know that short lncRNA fragments are known to all intelligent serious scientists as microRNAs exemplifies human idiocy displayed by theorists. See for comparison:

“A microRNA (abbreviated miRNA) is a small single-stranded non-coding RNA molecule (containing about 22 nucleotides) found in plants, animals and some viruses, that functions in RNA silencing and post-transcriptional regulation of gene expression.[1] miRNAs function via base-pairing with complementary sequences within mRNA molecules.[2] As a result, these mRNA molecules are silenced…”

Clearly, if you do not know the difference between an lncRNA and a microRNA, you cannot explain how light-activated carbon fixation and pH-dependent RNA-guided human genome engineering must be explained.

See: RNA technologies explained 8/25/21

Broadly speaking, RNA comes in two forms: long and short. mRNA vaccines are “long” RNA—typically 1000s of nucleobases—where each base is like a byte in programming code. Beyond vaccines, mRNA could also be used to treat certain forms of cancers or even create cancer vaccines.

There is no such thing as an mRNA vaccine or the possibility of a cancer vaccine outside the context of their synthesis in the lab. The likelihood of the lab-based synthesis of SARS-CoV-2 can be compared to the light-activated Creation of the microRNA-RNA-peptide nanocomplex that protects all organized genomes from the virus-driven degradation of mRNA.

In the context of what is known about how viruses link mutations to all pathology, it has begun to appear that SARS-CoV-2 was genetically engineered to require ineffective treatment with RNA interference. For comparison it also appears that former President Donald J. Trump was correct when he claimed on 4/23/20 that sunlight and humidity weaken COVID-19.

Keep Reading