Jay R. Feierman

In his posts that I have linked below, Jay R. Feierman takes us from random mutations on which natural selection acts to natural selection for phenotypes and changes in the brain that lead to increased reproductive success. According to him, the change in the brain can be called an adaptation.
In my model, ecological variation and nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled epigenetically-effected ecological, social, neurogenic, and socio-cognitive niche construction enable organismal complexity of the human brain. Ecological variation links the epigenetic landscape to the physical landscape of DNA in the organized genome of species from microbes to man. That fact is exemplified in model many organisms, but it is a fact that Feierman seems unable to understand.
Jay R. Feierman: I am absolutely certain that if you showed this statement to any professor of biology or genetics in any accredited university anywhere in the world that 100% of them would say that “Random mutations are the substrate upon which directional natural selection acts” is a correct and true statement. 
Foote et al (2013)“Ecological variation is the raw material by which natural selection can drive evolutionary divergence [1–4].”
James V. Kohl:  “Evolution by natural selection cannot be the outcome if something is not first selected. Selection is always for nutrients. It is as simple as that.”
Jay R. Feierman: 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 Darwinian biological evolution.
Jay R. Feierman: “…natural selection “selects” for phenotypes, not for genotypes.”
Dobzhansky (1972): “Reproductive isolation evidently can arise with little or no morphological differentiation.”
Dobzhansky (1964): 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!
James V. Kohl:  Adaptations and increased brain size in mammals
Jay R. Feierman: “…When the brain changes as a result of an interaction with the environment, and if the change in the brain leads to increased survival and reproductive success, that change can be called an adaptation. 
Addendum 2/15/14
After everything he has said to denigrate me and everything he has done to prevent discussion of my series of published works on ecological variation and adaptations via the epigenetic effects of olfactory/pheromonal input, and only after it has become perfectly clear that there is no such thing as mutation-initiated natural selection, Feierman includes epigenetically turned on genes in the context of selection. Now Feierman implies that epigenetically turned on genes AND mutations can cause natural selection.
Jay R. Feierman: Natural selection is the equivalent of a directional vector force. A directional vector force can’t do anything without something, such as mutations or epigenetically turned on genes, on which to do it!
I reiterate: Selection is always for nutrients. It is as simple as that! Nutrients epigenetically effect the de novo creation of genes and are metabolized to species-specific pheromones that epigenetically control the de novo creation of genes that is responsible for increasing organismal complexity and species diversity via ecological, social, neurogenic, and socio-cognitive niche construction.
Jay R. Feierman: One can’t separate natural selection and mutations…
Does anyone else think that different races and their morphological and behavioral traits are naturally selected in the context of mutation-driven evolution and diseases associated with reproductive fitness? In every other species from microbes to man, differences in morphological and behavioral traits associated with reproductive fitness are examples of ecological adaptations.  It seems racist, sexist, and homophobic to imply that ecological adaptations in other species are examples of mutation-driven evolution in humans.  See for example: New forms of racism arise in science research
Excerpt: “Published research has shown that blacks are more likely than whites to have a blood type that causes sickle cell disease and can protect against malaria, and are more likely to have a certain gene called APOL1, which protects against a parasite that causes sleeping sickness.”
My comment: If sickle cell disease is due to an RNA-mediated event and nutrient-dependent amino acid substitution that results in one of 1182 hemoglobin variants, it is an ecological adaptation. Anyone who claims that sickle cell disease is due to a mutation should either support that claim with experimental evidence  of what causes the mutation and how it is naturally selected in some circumstances that appear to vary with skin pigmentation, or be prepared to defend themselves from claims that they are racists.