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)
Posters
See also for comparison: Viruses Have Guided the Path of Human Evolution
Excerpt:
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.”
See for comparison: Viruses are a dominant driver of protein adaptation in mammals
Abstract excerpt:
We conservatively estimate that viruses have driven close to 30% of all adaptive amino acid changes in the part of the human proteome conserved within mammals.
My comment: Only researchers who are supported by the evolution industry or the big bang cosmology industry make claims about viruses and protein adaptation . Serious scientists know how energy-dependent changes in angstroms to ecosystems link RNA methylation, learning, and memory to cell type differentiation via nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions. Serious scientists know that fixation of amino acid substititutions in organized genomes is required to link the epigenetic landscape to the physical landscape of DNA.
See Dobzhansky (1973):
Excerpt:
E. Margoliash, W. M. Fitch, and others have compared the amino acid sequences in cytochrome C in different branches of the living world. Most significant similarities as well as differences have been brought to light. The cytochrome C of different orders of mammals and birds differ in 2 to 17 amino acids, classes of vertebrates in 7 to 38, and vertebrates and insects in 23 to 41; and animals differ from yeasts and molds in 56 to 72 amino acids. Fitch and Margoliash prefer to express their findings in what are called “minimal mutational distances.” It has been mentioned above that different amino acids are coded by different triplets of nucleotides in DNA of the genes; this code is now known.
My comment: Without energy-dependent RNA methylation, learning, and memory, the physiology of reproduction could not be linked to supercoiled DNA, which protects all organized genomes from virus-driven entropy. The RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions do not link viruses to human evolution.
Excerpt:
…an astonishing 30 percent of all protein adaptations since humans’ divergence with chimpanzees have been driven by viruses.
My comment: All protein adaptations are nutrient energy-dependent, and the energy must be linked from RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions to cell type differentiation via the species-specific physiology of reproduction and species specific behaviors.
Again, see Dobzhansky (1973): 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).”
What’s missing from the ridiculous representations of top-down causation that continue to be made by pseudoscientists?
See for example: Notable Science Quotes
Excerpt:
[Viruses], not lions, tigers or bears, sit masterfully above us on the food chain of life, occupying a role as alpha predators who prey on everything and are preyed upon by nothing.
My comment: How are the predatory viruses controlled to keep them from stealing the energy required for cell type differentiation? Who is addressing the anti-entropic virucidal epigenetic effect of ultraviolet light on the immune system and supercoiled DNA in the context of primate brain development that is altered by RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions in organisms from nematodes to humans?
See for example: Olfactory organ of Octopus vulgaris: morphology, plasticity, turnover and sensory characterization
See for comparison: Comprehensive map of primate brain development: Transcriptional atlas sheds crucial light on what makes human brain development distinct
Excerpt:
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?
See also: Direct radiocarbon dating and genetic analyses on the purported Neanderthal mandible from the Monti Lessini (Italy)
Conclusion:
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.
See: Researchers Cast Doubt on CRISPR-Like System in Giant Viruses
Excerpt:
“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.
“…viral latency is responsible for life-long pathogenesis and mortality risk…” — Epigenetics and Genetics of Viral Latency
See also: Viral Genome Junk Is Bunk
Excerpt:
…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″