See: Life is energy-dependent task management (2)
Revisiting the terroristic atheistic threat.
See discussion of: ‘The Terrorist Inside My Husband’s Brain’: Robin Williams’ Widow Details His Disease
Rick Raul Just speaking for myself, I’m a little tired of reading pseudo-science pushed by creationists.
Creationism is not an ‘alternative theory’, but a dressed-up religious opposition to science; this is well covered elsewhere, including court rulings to this effect.
Here this person James Kohl calls himself medical laboratory scientist, who offers his own “take home” points from research papers, which, to me, mostly illustrate how hard he’s trying to read ‘alternative’ meanings into research work.
One of the most basic skills needed is sound critical thinking. Part of that is that you need to be *critical* of what you read, rather than parrot it or read you own meanings into it. There are courses that deal with this critical thinking – e.g. A course for all degrees: PHIL 105, Critical Thinking
My comment: Rick Raul may be confused because the ‘Criticisms’ of my model linked it to a refutation of neo-Darwinian nonsense 2 years ago, and there is still no other model for comparison.
See also: The central pattern generator underlying swimming in Dendronotus iris: a simple half-center network oscillator with a twist
My comment: Anna Di Cosmo’s group linked the central pattern generator across species from octopuses and all other invertebrates to all vertebrates.
See: Role of olfaction in Octopus vulgaris reproduction
Future work on O. vulgaris olfaction must also consider how animals acquire the odours detected by the olfactory organ and what kind of odour the olfactory organ perceives. The OL acting as control centre may be target organ for metabolic hormones such as leptin like and insulin like peptides, and olfactory organ could exert regulatory action on the OL via epigenetic effects of nutrients and pheromones on gene expression (Kohl, 2013; Elekonich and Robinson, 2000).
But see for comparison: Criticisms of the nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled evolutionary model
…James Kohl presents an unsupported challenge to modern evolutionary theory and misrepresentations of established scientific terms and others’ research. It was a mistake to let such a sloppy review through to be published.
My comments: Both publications refer to the same model. It has since linked everything known about thermodynamic cycles of protein biosynthesis and degradation from autophagy to supercoiled DNA, which protects all organized genomes from virus driven energy theft and genomic entropy.
Pseudoscientific hate-mongers are almost always the first to claim that anyone who doesn’t believe in their ridiculous theories is a creationist. For comparison, every serious scientist I have ever met has not been a theorist. That may be due to the fact that Dobzhansky (1973) declared that he was a creationist in Nothing in Biology Makes Any Sense Except in the Light of Evolution.
There seems to be a pattern to how the central pattern generator was created and linked to the death of Robin Williams by virus-driven energy theft, which destroyed his ability to recognize the cause of his untimely demise.