Abiogenesis vs microRNA biogenesis (2)

For God and Country

All serious scientists learned about Schrödinger’s claims in “What is Life?” (1944).  All serious scientists have since linked the creation of the sun’s anti-entropic virucidal energy to “negentropy” and healthy longevity. See also: Reappraising the human mitochondrial DNA recombination dogma …paving the way for the definitive rejection of the non-recombination dogma for human mtDNA.   Abiogenesis vs microRNA biogenesis (2)

Science vs Secularism: Molecular Mechanisms or Math?

Summary: An example from ancient knowledge of trigonometry links pattern recognition as the basis for the science of creationism, and pattern recognition also is the basis for molecular biology. What form of virus-driven pathology would you most like to see eliminated from future consideration by serious scientists who know how energy-dependent RNA-mediated cell type differentiation Science vs Secularism: Molecular Mechanisms or Math?

Metaphysical science vs theory

I’ve wasted too much time attempting to explain biologically-based facts to the biologically uninformed discussants on Science X network. This is an attempt to salvage some of the time and to move forward.  See: New comments posted on Science X network: – A natural history of neurons: Diverse mutations reveal lineage of brain cells : Metaphysical science vs theory

MicroRNA controlled growth and brain development

Navigable networks as Nash equilibria of navigation games Nature Communications | Article  Open Excerpt: Here we show that the ideal maximally navigable networks do share some basic structural properties with the Internet, E.coli metabolic network, English word network, US airport network, the Hungarian road network and a structural network of the human brain. Reported as: MicroRNA controlled growth and brain development

“Kardashians” in science

On “Kardashians” in science and the general relationship between achievement and fame Posted on September 19, 2014 by Lascap Excerpt Ultimately, it is all about the relevance of one’s contribution. But trying to discredit an increasingly important form of academic activity (outreach), by shaming those engaged in it, is probably uncalled for. My comment: The “Kardashians” in science

Modeling epigenome dynamics: Polycomb

some academics care more about reputation than science, and about appearing to be knowledgeable more than actually being knowledgeable. They will only give credit when forced to do so, or when it is politically expedient.