Protosuns, prebiotic molecules, proteins, and people

We have detected formamide in five protosuns, which proves that this molecule (in all probability also true for our Solar System) is relatively abundant in molecular clouds and is formed in the very early stages of evolution towards a star and its planets...”
My comment: Finding a molecule in five or more protsuns proves nothing about the early stages of evolution. An intelligent person might ask how proteins ‘evolved” from prebiotic molecules to people, after stars and planets “evolved.”
If an intelligent person asked another intelligent person, other people might learn that proteins cannot “evolve” outside the context of the light-induced de novo creation of amino acids. The de novo creation of nucleic acids and amino acids appears to occur when the speed of light is slowed on contact with water. See, for instance: Common origins of RNA, protein and lipid precursors in a cyanosulfidic protometabolism and Single-residue insertion switches the quaternary structure and exciton states of cryptophyte light-harvesting proteins
Others have complained that I have not linked the speed of light to the de novo creation of nucleic acids and amino acids via the common origins of RNA. But also, I have not claimed that you can get to evolution of suns and planets from molecules found in protosuns without the creation of amino acids and their gain and loss, which links them to biodiversity via protein biosynthesis and degradation.
That fact means my claims can be compared to the claims about protosuns, prebiotic molecules, proteins, and people in the context of what is known about proteins.
See for instance: A universal trend of amino acid gain and loss in protein evolution (2005)

We cannot conceive of a global external factor that could cause, during this time, parallel evolution of amino acid compositions of proteins in 15 diverse taxa that represent all three domains of life and span a wide range of lifestyles and environments. Thus, currently, the most plausible hypothesis is that we are observing a universal, intrinsic trend that emerged before the last universal common ancestor of all extant organisms.

My comment: The claim that the last universal common ancestor of all extant organisms emerged after the evolution of stars and planets from protosuns can be placed into the context of what serious scientists have detailed about the creation of different proteins and organisms.
I. Protein Synthesis: a High Fidelity Molecular Event (video)
II. mRNA Surveillance by the Ribosome (video)
Speaker bio exerpt with my emphasis: Rachel Green received her BS in chemistry from the University of Michigan. She then moved to Harvard to pursue her PhD in the lab of Jack Szostak where she worked on designing catalytic RNA molecules and investigating their implications for the evolution of life. 
My comment: Designing catalytic molecules could be compared to attempts to design the autocatalytic RNA molecules that link the biophysically constrained RNA-mediated protein folding chemistry of cell type differentiation in all living genera. The design of catalytic RNA molecules does not suggest that the evolution of life occurred.
What Rachel Green shows us is that even mainsteam scientists are not likely to incorporated claims about mutations and natural selection into their representations of auto-catalytic events that link the epigenetic landscape to the physical landscape of DNA via metabolic networks and genetic networks in all living genera.

It’s nice when mainstream scientists take the lead in rescuing DNA from the genetic junk pile.
See also:
Origin and Evolution of Human microRNAs From Transposable Elements (2007)
Functional microRNAs and target sites are created by lineage-specific transposition (2014)

Taken together, our data provide additional evidence for TEs [Transposable Elements] as a source for miRNAs and miRNA target sites, with instances of conservation through the course of mammalian evolution.

My comment: They appear to assume that mammals evolved from protosuns. A serious scientist would attempt to supply experimental evidence that links the energy from protosuns to our sun’s anti-entropic biological energy. A serious scientist would link the anti-entropic energy to biodiversity via the de novo creation of amino acids. The serious scientist could then link RNA-mediated events to amino acid substitutions and cell type diversity in all cells of all individuals of all living genera via their biophysically constrained chemistry of nutrient-dependent protein folding.
A serious scientist would not, however, assume that the human genome evolved from protosuns.

The imprimatur of science should be awarded only to a theory that is testable. Only then can we defend science from attack.

For experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect that links physics and chemistry to biology, via molecular epigenetics, see: MIR retrotransposon sequences provide insulators to the human genome

Insulators are genome sequence elements that help to organize eukaryotic genomes into coherent regulatory domains.

My comment: “Insulators” exemplify the fact that an anti-entropic force is required to link the de novo creation of nucleic acids and amino acids to RNA-mediated gene duplication and RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions that differentiate all cell types of all living genera via the nutrient-dependent physiology of reproduction. The likelihood that the insulators arise only in the context of nutrient-dependent microRNAs that prevent the accumulation of viral microRNAs from leading to genomic entropy via entropic elasticity seems more likely than the evolution of suns, planets, and people from a molecule found in protosuns.
See also: Global diversity, population stratification, and selection of human copy number variation

…duplications and deletions exhibit fundamentally different population-genetic properties. Duplications are subjected to weaker selective constraint and are four times more likely to affect genes than deletions (Table 1) indicating that they provide a larger target for adaptive selection.

I’ve requested a preprint of this article, which I think will also help to show that ecological variation and ecological adaptations are not likely to be linked from protosuns to people outside the context of biophysically constrained nutrient-dependent protein folding chemistry, which has not been linked to the evolution of anything from anything else by anyone who is biologically informed.

Adaptability of protein structures to enable functional interactions and evolutionary implications

Abstract excerpt:

Structural dynamics, including the allosteric switches in conformation that are often stabilized upon formation of complexes and multimeric assemblies, emerge as key properties that are evolutionarily maintained to accomplish biological activities, consistent with the paradigm sequence → structure → dynamics → function where ‘dynamics’ bridges structure and function.

The paradigm sequence that links structure → dynamics → function to human morphological and behavioral traits is: gene → cell → tissue → organ → organ system, which attests to the fact that neo-Darwian theories are based on nothing more than pseudoscientific nonsense. The sequence begins with an epigenetic link from the sensory environment that activates genes, but does not cause them to mutate unless nutrient-stress or social stress enable virus-pertubed protein folding that cannot be repaired by the anti-entropic epigenetic effects of nutrients.

See: Beyond neo-Darwinism—an epigenetic approach to evolution and Mae-Wan Ho: No Boundary Really Between Genetic and Epigenetic

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *