New evidence for anthropic theory that fundamental physics constants underlie life-enabling universe

January 16, 2015, Science China Press
Graphical representation of the question of how fine-tuned life on Earth is under variations of the average light quark mass and α_{EM}. Image courtesy of Dean Lee. Credit: Science China Press

For nearly half a century, theoretical physicists have made a series of discoveries that certain constants in fundamental physics seem extraordinarily fine-tuned to allow for the emergence of a life-enabling universe. Constants that crisscross the Standard Model of Particle Physics guided the formation of hydrogen nuclei during the Big Bang, along with the carbon and oxygen atoms initially fused at the center of massive first-generation stars that exploded as supernovae; these processes in turn set the stage for solar systems and planets capable of supporting carbon-based life dependent on water and oxygen.

The theory that an Anthropic Principle guided the physics and evolution of the universe was initially proposed by Brandon Carter while he was a post-doctoral researcher in astrophysics at the University of Cambridge; this theory was later debated by Cambridge scholar Stephen Hawking and a widening web of physicists around the world.

German scholar Ulf-G Meißner, chair in theoretical nuclear physics at the Helmholtz Institute, University of Bonn, adds to a series of discoveries that support this Anthropic Principle.

In a new study titled "Anthropic considerations in nuclear physics" and published in the Beijing-based journal Science Bulletin (previously titled Chinese Science Bulletin), Professor Meißner provides an overview of the Anthropic Principle (AP) in astrophysics and particle physics and states: "One can indeed perform physics tests of this rather abstract [AP] statement for specific processes like element generation."

"This can be done with the help of high performance computers that allow us to simulate worlds in which the fundamental parameters underlying take values different from the ones in Nature," he explains.

"Specific physics problems we want to address, namely how sensitive the generation of the light elements in the Big Bang is to changes in the light quark mass m_q and also, how robust the resonance condition in the triple alpha process, i.e. the closeness of the so-called Hoyle state to the energy of 4He+8Be, is under variations in m_q and the electromagnetic fine structure constant α_{EM}," he adds.

Brandon Carter initially posited the theory: "The universe (and hence the fundamental parameters on which it depends) must be such as to admit the creation of observers within it at some stage."

Stephen Hawking, expert on the Big Bang and cosmic inflation, extended the dialogue on the Anthropic Principle in a series of papers and books. In "A Brief History of Time," he outlines an array of astrophysics phenomena and constants that seem to support the AP theory, and asks: "Why did the universe start out with so nearly the critical rate of expansion that separates models that recollapse from those that go on expanding forever, that even now, ten thousand million years later, it is still expanding at nearly the critical rate?"

"If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million," he explains, "the universe would have recollapsed before it ever reached its present size."

Professor Ulf-G Meißner, in explaining his new groundbreaking study, states: "The Universe we live in is characterized by certain parameters that take specific values that appear to be remarkably fine-tuned to make life, including on Earth, possible. "

"For example, the age of the Universe must be large enough to allow for the formation of galaxies, stars and planets, and for second- and third-generation stars that incorporated the carbon and oxygen propagated by earlier exploding stars," he says.

"On more microscopic scales, he adds, "certain fundamental parameters of the Standard Model of light quark masses or the electromagnetic fine structure constant must take values that allow for the formation of neutrons, protons and atomic nuclei."

And while the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis gave rise to and alpha particles (4He nuclei), elements widely regarded as essential to life including carbon and oxygen were only produced later, inside massive stars that burned bright and died quickly, some through a supernova explosion that spread these elements to later generations of star systems.

In one series of experiments involving intricate computer simulations on JUQUUEN at Forschungszentrum Jülich, Professor Meißner and his colleagues altered the values of light quark masses from those found in Nature to determine how great a variation would prevent the formation of carbon or oxygen inside massive stars. "Variations in the light quark masses of up to 2-3 percent are unlikely to be catastrophic to the formation of life-essential carbon and oxygen," he concludes. (please see Figure 1)

And earlier, during the Big Bang's generation of the nuclei of first two elements in the Periodic Table, he notes, "From the observed element abundances and the fact that the free neutron decays in about 882 seconds and the surviving neutrons are mostly captured in 4He, one finds a stringent bound on the light quark mass variations ... under the reasonable assumption that the masses of all quarks and leptons appearing in neutron β-decay scale with the Higgs vacuum expectation value."

"Thus," Professor Meißner states, "the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis sets indeed very tight limits on the variations of the light quark mass."

"Such extreme fine-tuning supports the anthropic view of our Universe," he adds.

"Clearly, one can think of many universes, the multiverse, in which various fundamental parameters take different values leading to environments very different from ours," Professor Meißner states.

Professor Stephen Hawking states that even slight alterations in the life-enabling constants of fundamental physics in this hypothesized multiverse could "give rise to universes that, although they might be very beautiful, would contain no one able to wonder at that beauty."

Professor Meißner agrees: "In that sense," he says, "our Universe has a preferred status, and this is the basis of the so-called Anthropic Principle."

Explore further: Foundations of carbon-based life leave little room for error

More information: Meißner, U. "Anthropic considerations in nuclear physics" Science Bulletin, 2015, 60(1) : 43-54. link.springer.com/article/10.1 … %2Fs11434-014-0670-2

Related Stories

Foundations of carbon-based life leave little room for error

March 13, 2013

Life as we know it is based upon the elements of carbon and oxygen. Now a team of physicists, including one from North Carolina State University, is looking at the conditions necessary to the formation of those two elements ...

Variables of nature

September 5, 2014

Within physics there are certain physical quantities that play a central role. These are things such as the mass of an electron, or the speed of light, or the universal constant of gravity. We aren't sure why these constants ...

Fundamental question on how life started solved?

May 9, 2011

For carbon, the basis of life, to be able to form in the stars, a certain state of the carbon nucleus plays an essential role. In cooperation with US colleagues, physicists from the University of Bonn and Ruhr-Universitat ...

Recommended for you

Pond dwellers called Euglena swim in polygons to avoid light

September 25, 2018

In any seemingly quiet pond the still waters actually teem with tiny pond dwellers called Euglena gracilis. Unseen to the naked eye, the single-celled organism spirals through the water, pulled along a relatively straight ...

Explainer: The US push to boost 'quantum computing'

September 24, 2018

A race by U.S. tech companies to build a new generation of powerful "quantum computers" could get a $1.3 billion boost from Congress, fueled in part by lawmakers' fear of growing competition from China.

A new way to count qubits

September 24, 2018

Researchers at Syracuse University, working with collaborators at the University of Wisconsin (UW)-Madison, have developed a new technique for measuring the state of quantum bits, or qubits, in a quantum computer.

185 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

crusher
2 / 5 (7) Jan 16, 2015
its the ultimate conceit.
bill13
4.6 / 5 (15) Jan 16, 2015
An Anthropic Principle did not "guide" the physics and evolution of the universe as though life was a "goal". Since the fundamental physics constants have the values they do, life was able to develop. If the fundamental physics constants had different values such that life could not have developed then there would still be a universe (depending on the actual values) but there just wouldn't be any intelligent beings (us) to study this universe.
Bob one
1.3 / 5 (25) Jan 16, 2015
The Anthropic Principle is based on a belief in evolution and ignoring the second law of thermodynamics. Life comes only from life. Atheists are asking for miracles without a miracle maker.
oneSTARman
3.9 / 5 (7) Jan 16, 2015
Wouldn't it be Strange if the Universe in which we find ourselves did NOT favor the formation of Life? That is not to say that such a Universe is the ONLY possible one - just that the one where we contemplate this probability MUST be able to support life because - Here we Are.
I tend to most accept a 'Many Worlds' understanding of Existence.
If a Particle can exist in multiple states then perhaps it exists in ALL such states.
Simultaneously - Somewhere.
And there is an Infinite Number of Universe Realities SOMEWHERE within the Multiverse to contain the Infinite number of Combination of ALL Particles in the Universe in ALL Possible States.
justindadswell
2.4 / 5 (5) Jan 16, 2015
Early computers were simply gas or fluid chambers acting as on/off switches.
Long as a universe supports both + and -, then it can support life. Given enough time, a monkey locked in a room with a type writer will eventually write Shakespeare. Due to the vastness of each universe, life is bound to happen in most of them.

It just may not be life as we understand it, but as long as that on/off switch exists then life can and probably will happen.
woodlandsnursery01
4.3 / 5 (3) Jan 16, 2015
Interesting article- hard to digest not understanding any of the physics. In the beginning what ignited the initial big bang to start the process. I understand the concept that in the beginning if something is off everything changes (reasonable), It seems that it must be possible for multiple / alternative universes- but where did the spark occur from darkness to create the big bang concept that created a single universe. Once we understand this- the answers should follow.

Until then- Is this theory not the same as- if a tree falls in the forest and no one here's it did it really make sound. Fun though.

Just a dumb guy asking
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (20) Jan 16, 2015
Life comes only from life. Atheists are asking for miracles without a miracle maker.
Well if the universe was intelligently designed it was most certainly not designed by a god who wrote a book about things we know never happened and people we know never existed.

The book that this god wrote fails to describe the universe we live in. The andromeda galaxy for instance LOOKS like it is 2.5M light years away. This god would have had to drop every single photon from every object in that galaxy in exactly the proper location and send it on its way, in order to maintain this illusion in a 10k-old universe.

But why would the bookgod DO this? Why would he go to such extraordinary lengths to deceive us about absolutely EVERYTHING?

Consider that this bookgod must have fabricated the anthropic illusion as well, because we use exactly the same evidence to construct that theory, as we do to discern the age of the universe. ANY natural evidence for his existence is suspect.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.2 / 5 (11) Jan 16, 2015
But here these people are trying to say that the Universe is the way it is because otherwise we would not be here. As a result we here have an inversion between 1. the cause (us), and 2. the effect (natural laws being what they are)
Yeah its called teleology,

'the explanation of phenomena by the purpose they serve rather than by postulated causes.'

-An old philo trick.

Humans are certainly capable of designing things to achieve a preconceived result. in fact it explains most all of history.
editor-b
1 / 5 (1) Jan 16, 2015
But, which is the probability that within a galaxy like the milky way, from the dust of its exploded stars, the anthropomorphic being who uses a computer was formed - computer included? A favourable case among infinite unfavourable possibilities? Fifty-fifty? To be or not to be, is that the question? Are calculations simplified or made more complex when the subjective self of each one becomes the entity that is studied? Anyway, what is the relationship between life and immense numbers? Is life a folding process of infinity? Is it just something infinite that would have enough to allow a self, something isolated but of infinite claims? But, is infinity credible within something with a beginning, out of a Big Bang? And is it credible within something with an ending, with the inevitable death around the corner? Along these lines, there is a peculiar skpetical book, a preview at goo.gl/rfVqw6 Just another suggestion that can be easily ignored
Trihalo42
not rated yet Jan 16, 2015
I think the only real point they're tying to make is that it has taken extremely specific conditions for our universe to support life, and that we can't expect some alternate universe with somewhat vaguely similar laws of physics to also support life as we know it. The psychedelic concepts of alternate realities seen in sci-fi don't work so well.
Rotoscience
4.8 / 5 (5) Jan 16, 2015
The Anthropic Principle is not hard to understand. If a being, any being, developed and prospered and only certain very specific circumstances would have allowed for that to happen, then that being would be unable (objectively) to determine whether its existence was caused by circumstance or design. That's it. I don't make any more of it. Period.
Whydening Gyre
4.1 / 5 (9) Jan 16, 2015
An Anthropic Principle did not "guide" the physics and evolution of the universe as though life was a "goal". Since the fundamental physics constants have the values they do, life was able to develop. If the fundamental physics constants had different values such that life could not have developed then there would still be a universe (depending on the actual values) but there just wouldn't be any intelligent beings (us) to study this universe.

I believe you're wrong about the "wouldn't be any intelligence" part... it just might not take the same physical form. Intelligence is a result of a universe' "self organizing"
mechanism (fundamental physics).
Protoplasmix
4.9 / 5 (7) Jan 16, 2015
The strongest criticism I could find is, "If things were different, then they would be different."

Nature comes with its own set of axioms. When a photon (or electron, or buckyball or whatever at that scale) goes from point A to point B, what path does it take? All of them.
RobertKarlStonjek
5 / 5 (10) Jan 16, 2015
If you start with an outcome and wonder how that outcome was chosen from random processes then you might imagine an ethereal guiding hand. But if you start with the random process rather than one of the many possible outcomes then there is no mystery to solve.

Life as we know it was one of many possible outcomes. Some of the others may have yielded superior life forms with greater intelligence, humanity and other noble qualities.

Pity, then, that the process is random...
Phil DePayne
5 / 5 (6) Jan 16, 2015
Our universe is fine-tuned in such a way as to produce a Stephen Hawking, who then can observe that there are many universes with no Stephen Hawkings!!!
horsefeathers
1 / 5 (2) Jan 16, 2015
It seems to me that the questions inevitably raised by this and related entries address a singular question since that which is is... Sorry, Bill. Is the set of rules/laws that initiate and maintain this universe aware of self? Secondly, is response ability a form no matter how primitive of consciousness? Thirdly, is Consciousness singular. I suggest that if the answers are yes, the answer to the unstated question is "yes"... if no then "no". That which is is, regardless of belief. Restated: is consciousness a potential or an attribute of energy?
NATO 7_62mm X 51mm
not rated yet Jan 17, 2015
Honestly now, do you understand this?
"........ and also, how robust the resonance condition in the triple alpha process, i.e. the closeness of the so-called Hoyle state to the energy of 4He+8Be, is under variations in m_q and the electromagnetic fine structure constant α_{EM},"

"To me, it clearly shows the limit of how high I can jump...."
someone11235813
not rated yet Jan 17, 2015
...although they might be very beautiful, would contain no one able to wonder at that beauty.


Or hunt whales or cut down rainforests etc.
saccoflame
3.7 / 5 (3) Jan 17, 2015
Human beings and consciousness are a naturally occurring part of the universe. To say there isn't something fundamental about consciousness is the same as saying there isn't something fundamental about electrons.
PhotonX
5 / 5 (10) Jan 17, 2015
The Anthropic Principle is based on a belief in evolution and ignoring the second law of thermodynamics. Life comes only from life. Atheists are asking for miracles without a miracle maker.
I doubt very much if you understand either evolution or thermodynamics. I'm not claiming I do either, but then I'm not the one making unsupported and unfalsifiable a priori assertions such as "life only comes from life". And even if we could agree on a definition of what constitutes a miracle, I don't see any atheists here asking for one. Unless, of course, it would be for you to free your mind from the rigid dogma it's shackled with to genuinely evaluate your belief system. How much of a miracle would that be? What you're unwilling to consider is that the 'finely tuned Universe' is an even better argument for a multiverse than it is for the existence of gods. Free your mind.
Whydening Gyre
3.9 / 5 (7) Jan 17, 2015
Restated: is consciousness a potential or an attribute of energy?

Both.
viko_mx
1.4 / 5 (9) Jan 17, 2015
Evolutionary theories actually are salvation for conscience of kleptocracy cast, which normally can not thrive in a Christian society that lives by God's laws and principles. So at least party of this cast is most interested in the proliferation of delusions and false theories in society. An atheist who does not accept God authority accepts human authorities. These are the people with the money in the materialistic world. When one society denied God's law, they have the power to create their own laws in society for their needs. For Christians the only authority is God. Therefore they can not be obedient unfree citizens, since God has given us the right to freedom, independence and free conscience. The problem of false theories is that the popular media experts and scienties that try to prove them always will fail. In principle it is impossible to prove a lie as truth to intelligent and honest people. Honest man immediately felt the lie that violate harmony in his soul.
viko_mx
1 / 5 (8) Jan 17, 2015
Dishonest people can be easily deceived, because they have no sense of harmony.
alfie_null
5 / 5 (6) Jan 17, 2015
How many ways can the universe be tweaked? Of that set, how many tweaks support life? Of that set, how many support it better than our existing universe?

All sorts of stuff we deal with may seem fantastically improbable. Despite the overwhelming number of alternative paths I might have taken throughout my life, here I am whinging at a bunch of philosophizing scientists. Could have been basking on a tropical beach - ah well.
highlowsel
3 / 5 (3) Jan 17, 2015
Perhaps, if there truly is a creative initiating force behind the Universe, perhaps we intelligent naked chimps have a basic misread of the initial presumption that there was a "Let there be Light" decree/moment. Perhaps 'tis better stated...."Let there be LIFE!" The Universe took this as the standing order and has run with it from there ever since.

Just some (not very deep I'll admit) thoughts.

gwrede
1 / 5 (3) Jan 17, 2015
I've found a delightful proof that AP is rubbish. Unfortunately it just doesn't fit into this text box.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Jan 17, 2015
It seems to me that the questions inevitably raised by this and related entries address a singular question since that which is is... Sorry, Bill. Is the set of rules/laws that initiate and maintain this universe aware of self? Secondly, is response ability a form no matter how primitive of consciousness? Thirdly, is Consciousness singular. I suggest that if the answers are yes, the answer to the unstated question is "yes"... if no then "no". That which is is, regardless of belief. Restated: is consciousness a potential or an attribute of energy?
Well this is easy. Consciousness is an illusion. It is a philo construct meant to obscure and confuse.
http://www.ted.co...guage=en
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (13) Jan 17, 2015
Evolutionary theories actually are salvation for conscience of kleptocracy cast, which normally can not thrive in a Christian society that lives by God's laws and principles
Modern society was created by gradually making religious laws illegal. Religionists were forced to give up the practices of stoning apostates, wayward women and insolent children. They were forced to abandon slavery and allow women to do something with their lives besides making babies until it killed them.

And they were forced to accept the idea that evidence instead of divine revelation is the sole source of knowledge about the natural world and the reasons we act the way we do.

Foremost among gods laws that had to be discarded for society to progress, was the edict that one had to believe in him in order to be good. No egalitarian society can exist with faith as the basis for morality.

Without the forced imposition of secular law, we would still be living in a dark age.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (13) Jan 17, 2015
they can not be obedient unfree citizens, since God has given us the right to freedom, independence and free conscience
Freedom is the ability to use our senses and our logic to discern the nature of the world around us, and to act on what we conclude is the best way to live in concert with it.

Religion teaches us that we are not qualified to make decisions for ourselves, that our senses are faulty and our reasoning is corrupt. In this way it binds us, confines us.

It does this by telling the most outrageous fairy tales from a position of authority, in order to deaden our reasoning faculties and have us reject the evidence of our senses. It hides behind the consensus of a large group of believers which it has enticed with impossible promises of immortality and wishes granted, and terrorized with threats of eternal damnation.

And it brazenly deems this condition of helplessness 'freedom' and 'independence' as a demonstration of our complete surrender of these things.
kochevnik
5 / 5 (6) Jan 17, 2015
@Ren82 Christian values are the foundation of the middle class in developed societies
Well they were the foundation of fascism in NAZI Germany [inquisition] and the core principle of communism [mass austerity]. Also many non-xtian societies had/have a middle class
Maezeppa
5 / 5 (6) Jan 17, 2015
This article reminds me of Creationist Kurt Cameron's argument that God exists because the banana is perfectly designed for the human hand to peel it.
fourinfinities
not rated yet Jan 17, 2015
God did it.
It's Bush's fault.
Blame it on Obama.
It was a lucky accident.
42.
zz5555
5 / 5 (12) Jan 17, 2015
For Christians the only authority is God.

Why, then, do so many Christians deny the authority of God? God says that prostitution, incest, slavery, and abortion are ok. How many Christians agree with this and how many deny God?
Robert_D
5 / 5 (9) Jan 17, 2015
Educated scientists glorifying circular reasoning and yet unable to recognize it themselves.

Causality and the arrow of time (propagation of time into one direction) play fundamental roles in natural laws.

But here these people are trying to say that the Universe is the way it is because otherwise we would not be here. As a result we here have an inversion between 1. the cause (us), and 2. the effect (natural laws being what they are).

Wordplays aside, the actual Universe does not work so that the cause comes AFTER the effect.

I don't see how they are inverting causality. If you were walking in the woods and you saw a puddle full of tadpoles, you wouldn't say the tadpoles caused the puddle. likewise, we didn't cause the universe, we just necessarily wound up in the space and time with the right physical constants needed for us to be alive.
johnksellers
4.4 / 5 (7) Jan 17, 2015
To the intelligent design nuts, I have a suggestion. Look for the Game of Life simulation called "Golly". Download it and play with it. With a very simple set of rules on a cellular space iterating in time, and an almost trival cell pattern as an initial condition, you can produce unbounded complexity....giving strong evidence that intelligent design isn't necessary for the evolution of life.

To the scientists I say that your imagination is too limited to understand that the constraints that you impose are too strict, and that Life in other Universes will probably come about In ways that are well beyond the scope of your considerations. I maintain that the only requirements for life to come about are that there are dynamics combined with enough possibility for complexity combined with enough stability.....and nothing else.

I think the Anthropic Principle is wrong in that our idea of life is very short sighted because we so grossly over anthropomorphize Our definition of Life.
PsycheOne
2.3 / 5 (3) Jan 17, 2015
What if the universe doesn't exist? What if it's imaginary? What if every physical law we've encountered and every cosmic constant we've calculated are inventions of our imagination? What if new laws and new constants are being invented constantly by us? They all would be in the range to support life, wouldn't they?

If you start with consciousness and create the illusion of a universe from it, all the constants you ever discover will be perfect matches for life.
johnksellers
5 / 5 (6) Jan 17, 2015
I want to add a little since my editing time on my previous comment expired. What I meant to say is that the only requirements for Life to come about is that there are enough dynamics, extent, complexity, chaos, order, and stability with nothing else required.
Whydening Gyre
2 / 5 (4) Jan 17, 2015
...standards of the dark ages and the moral relativism (double standards became standard for many politicians) , and atheism is part of the strategy that must replace the christianity as a faith of responsability, the right of free choise and freedom of conscience, the cooperation and mutual assistance between people, with religions of obedience and delusions.

Ren,
Usually I don't like what you comment and don't bother upvoting. These 2 comments were, however, worthy.
Robert_D
5 / 5 (1) Jan 17, 2015
I want to add a little since my editing time on my previous comment expired. What I meant to say is that the only requirements for Life to come about is that there are enough dynamics, extent, complexity, chaos, order, and stability with nothing else required.

But even if you are right, that would still not rule out the anthropic principle for OUR form of life, i.e. our particular kind of chemical/physical form of life. And if you are right, shouldn't the universe be teeming with life like something out of a Star Wars move?
Robert_D
5 / 5 (1) Jan 17, 2015
Maybe I'm wrong about my last comment. If life can arise no matter what random values the physical constants have, then we'd still be alive and see those vastly different constants; however, if we don't see the universe teeming with life forms based on different chemistries than ours, then the anthropic principle is probably true.
adimchio
1 / 5 (3) Jan 17, 2015
Educated scientists glorifying circular reasoning and yet unable to recognize it themselves.

Causality and the arrow of time (propagation of time into one direction) play fundamental roles in natural laws.

But here these people are trying to say that the Universe is the way it is because otherwise we would not be here. As a result we here have an inversion between 1. the cause (us), and 2. the effect (natural laws being what they are).

Wordplays aside, the actual Universe does not work so that the cause comes AFTER the effect.


If Professors Meißner and Hawkings are right, then they have come a long way behind the Bible that stated 3000 years ago that: "The highest heavens belong to the Lord, but the earth he has given to man" (Psalms 115:16 NIV) ... "TO WONDER AT THAT BEAUTY" (Prof. Stephen Hawkings would add).
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (12) Jan 17, 2015
The achievements of this civilization in science and culture are due to the reformation in the christian community that began in medieval Europe by Martin Luther and other spiritual leaders. It rejected the dogmas of catholicism at that time which hampered progress and knowledge in society to control it and which have pushed the christians of God
-I see... But the book hasnt changed a bit now has it? It still contains the same requirements for bigotry, violence, and the denial of reason and evidence which is the basis for all modern society doesnt it?

And it still says that unbelievers cannot be anything but evil. A sentiment that a shocking number of otherwise 'civilized' religionists like yourself hold true.

"In 1543 Luther published On the Jews and Their Lies in which he says that the Jews are a "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth.""
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (11) Jan 17, 2015
"Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has; it never comes to the aid of spiritual things, but more frequently than not struggles against the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God." Martin Luther

-Perhaps you want to cite a more agreeable character?
Christian values are the foundation of the middle class in developed societies
You only believe this because that is what you are told. But the book says you have to believe THIS:

"18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil... 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light"

-Im sorry but there is no place for this sort of bigotry in modern society. Which is why we have made it illegal.
kochevnik
not rated yet Jan 17, 2015
Maybe I'm wrong about my last comment. If life can arise no matter what random values the physical constants have, then we'd still be alive and see those vastly different constants; however, if we don't see the universe teeming with life forms based on different chemistries than ours, then the anthropic principle is probably true.
Life is something that is specialized to reproduce more life. This infinite iterative feedback function allows storage of information and wandering around phase space. Such a straightforward system should be viable in many different universes but their properties might be completely untenable in our universe. Matter seems important but a pure quantum energy being could possibly employ musical harmony and discord to emulate something like causality and feedback by harboring eigenfunctions in solotons or other stationary waves
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (12) Jan 17, 2015
"Pope Francis stated that anyone who insults a religion can expect "a punch in the nose," in an impromptu address to press aboard his official plane as it flew from Sri Lanka to the Philippines, Thursday."

-But the idea that people who dont believe in the godman cant be good, deeply offends me. So does the pope think its ok if I deck the next priest or preacher I see?

And we all know that if you religionists had your druthers you would be punching blasphemers and apostates, you would be nailing them to the cross, which is why you wear this foul torture symbol around your necks in rememberance. Most of the time youre content to imagine our eternal torment in the next life. But not all of the time.

It is only secular law that keeps you civil, and only in a few countries for limited periods of time.
Caliban
5 / 5 (6) Jan 17, 2015
The AP, insofar as we have been able to determine, only holds for carbon-based life.

It would make this concept a bit less murky if this point was emphasized.

And even at that, it is still a very narrow definition of life based entirely upon our empirical knowledge of it via our extremely localized experience and observation.
russell_russell
5 / 5 (4) Jan 17, 2015
RSK and tadpoles and recognizing philo tricks come closest.

"Pity, then, that the process is random..." - RSK

No.

Most fortunate then, that the process is random!

Why?

Allows outcomes besides carbon-based or human life. Most fortunate!

Given a choice, no one wants to be human.
Anyway, here are the other readers/commnetators most common mistakes:
https://medium.co...27f8a3a0

philstacy9
1 / 5 (1) Jan 17, 2015
Life is is just an interimediate event in a global warming-enabling universe.
PhotonX
4.9 / 5 (11) Jan 17, 2015
This article reminds me of Creationist Kurt Cameron's argument that God exists because the banana is perfectly designed for the human hand to peel it.
That was Ray Comfort, actually, who is Batman to his sidekick Kurt "Robin" Cameron. To Comfort's credit, he has since admitted that the statement was idiotic. He didn't understand that the banana has been systematically bred by human agriculturists to have its current desirable characteristics such as size, texture, and peelability, as opposed to the woody, finger-sized disappointment that nature (or gods, as the case may be) provided. He could have saved himself a good bit of embarrassment with a little basic fact checking, but where's the fun in that?
Whydening Gyre
2.3 / 5 (3) Jan 18, 2015
Life is something that is specialized to reproduce more life. This infinite iterative feedback function allows storage of information and wandering around phase space. Such a straightforward system should be viable in many different universes but their properties might be completely untenable in our universe. Matter seems important but a pure quantum energy being could possibly employ musical harmony and discord to emulate something like causality and feedback by harboring eigenfunctions in solotons or other stationary waves

It's always nice that an article can bring out the poet in everyone - even if not all that good...:-)
jsdarkdestruction
5 / 5 (4) Jan 18, 2015
. Life comes only from life. [q/]
where did the first life come from? Please show scientific data confirming your claim. In fact even data supporting it would work for me. God and the bible don't count.
Atheists are asking for miracles without a miracle maker.

That is funny. Where did the miracle creator come from? Explain how life originated from him or by him using the scientific method and current known physics.
Whydening Gyre
3.9 / 5 (7) Jan 18, 2015
He didn't understand that the banana has been systematically bred by human agriculturists to have its current desirable characteristics such as size, texture, and peelability, as opposed to the woody, finger-sized disappointment that nature (or gods, as the case may be) provided. He could have saved himself a good bit of embarrassment with a little basic fact checking, but where's the fun in that?

Would that mean the current grocery item we call a banana has been - gasp! dare I say it - genetically modified?!?!
Whydening Gyre
4 / 5 (8) Jan 18, 2015
How you connect fascism with christianity remains a mystery to me.

The concept of a single, unquestioned authority. No mystery. A concept co-opted by many "Christian" cultures in their zeal to convert everybody else on the planet.
Would you share your exotic thoughts on this matter? Fascists were interested in the occult doctrines, worship of the sun and you can be interested in what the swastika symbolizes.

You do realize, of course that the "swastika" was originally a symbol of harmony, flow, and good fortune (by following the harmony and good flow) from the Eastern Indian culture? (Also used by some North American indian cultures PRIOR TO being converted by "missionaries?
And that the cross, enfranchised by christian faiths, is a derivative of the "swastika", used by cultures for many centuries, if not millennia before them?
You do know all that, right?
Whydening Gyre
3.9 / 5 (7) Jan 18, 2015
...standards of the dark ages and the moral relativism (double standards became standard for many politicians) , and atheism is part of the strategy that must replace the christianity as a faith of responsability, the right of free choise and freedom of conscience, the cooperation and mutual assistance between people, with religions of obedience and delusions.

Ren,
Usually I don't like what you comment and don't bother upvoting. These 2 comments were, however, worthy.

Mooster prompted me to re-read and - oops.
Must have been a "pre coffee" comment... (or post Crown Royal)
Face it. The Universe was here first and we all just got lucky enough to grow into it.
javjav
4.2 / 5 (5) Jan 18, 2015
The universe is not "fine tune" designed for life to exist. Most planets do not have live, and the amount of energy and time required for even simple live to appear is enormous. Either it was not intelligent designed or it was designed by a retarded God
TimLong2001
5 / 5 (3) Jan 18, 2015
The existence of such a broad array of heavy elements on earth indicates that the materials that formed our solar system are the result on many supernova over a vast time span.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.2 / 5 (10) Jan 18, 2015
The christian community, which is an expression of God's laws and principles is incompatible with dictatorship
Ahaahaaa thats funny. Saying something does not make it so unless you are speaking for some god or other.

All theocracies in history have been essentially dictatorships of the worst sort, including the catholic reign of Europe during the middle ages, the Ottoman Empire, and the Japanese empire at the beginning of the 20th century.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.2 / 5 (10) Jan 18, 2015
"Theocracy is a form of government in which clergy have official recognition as the civil ruler and official policy is either governed by officials regarded as divinely guided, or is pursuant to the doctrine of a particular religion or religious group."

-Theocracies are by definition dictatorships as they are ruled by a god. But as these gods do not exist they are ruled in fact by priests and holy men who get to decide what their god thinks is best for the people.

They are also by definition undemocratic because they regard unbelievers as either second class citizens to one degree or another, or not as citizens at all.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (11) Jan 18, 2015
Fascists were interested in the occult doctrines, worship of the sun
-More ignorant xian propaganda.

"In addition to being depicted as being chosen by God, the regime presented Mussolini himself having omnipotent or godlike characteristics, such as being able to work superhuman amounts (14–16 hours) daily and never appearing tired. Fascist newspapers implied even that Mussolini had performed miracles... The Vatican implied that heavenly powers were aware that Mussolini had saved Italy from bolshevism and thus protected him."
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (11) Jan 18, 2015
"Franco depicted himself as the defender of "Catholic Spain" against "atheist Communism."

"Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's chief propagandist, said in a broadcast on 19 April 1936, that "Germany has been transformed into a great house of the Lord where the Fuhrer as our mediator stands before the throne of God.""
claudius8787
5 / 5 (2) Jan 18, 2015
I wonder if the process giving rise to the formation of the universe results in only this set of fundamental parameters?
Whydening Gyre
3 / 5 (4) Jan 18, 2015
I wonder if the process giving rise to the formation of the universe results in only this set of fundamental parameters?

I doubt it...
gkam
2.3 / 5 (3) Jan 18, 2015
"There is many false invented by mankind gods and only one true God."
-------------------------------------

That one couldn't be yours, could it?
claudius8787
1 / 5 (1) Jan 18, 2015
I wonder if the process giving rise to the formation of the universe results in only this set of fundamental parameters?

I doubt it...

If the formation process is a closed cycle, then it stands to reason that the fundamental parameters are inherently constrained.
kochevnik
5 / 5 (4) Jan 18, 2015
@ren There is many false invented by mankind gods and only one true God. I asking again what is common between fascists and Christianity?
Religion is from the word ligament, which in Rome meant "to rebind". The object of rebinding are the sticks, or facies, which strengthen the axe handle of fascism. You mention lunatic, but you are a case yourself screaming in denial of plain facts. You wouldn't know the truth if it was tattooed on your forehead. Presupposing there is one truth is arrogant and fascistic. Causality is dependent upon the inertial frame of reference
kochevnik
5 / 5 (6) Jan 18, 2015
Ren stop spamming a science site with your agenda-ridden voodoo cult propaganda. You have nothing useful to state here
Whydening Gyre
4.2 / 5 (10) Jan 18, 2015
[qIt's hard to be called a scientific site, but nonetheless I discuss scientific issues in most cases.
Cloaked in your own personal agenda...
Whydening Gyre
3.7 / 5 (6) Jan 18, 2015
If the formation process is a closed cycle, then it stands to reason that the fundamental parameters are inherently constrained.

So far as we have been able to ascertain - it isn't...
We just WANT it to be...
JVK
1 / 5 (6) Jan 18, 2015
Re: "Variations in the light quark masses of up to 2-3 percent are unlikely to be catastrophic to the formation of life-essential carbon and oxygen," he concludes."

Could the variations be catastrophic to theories that claim billions of years have passed since the big bang? What if the variations arose in undetectable increments of much less than 2-3 percent and that percent recognizes only the result of more rapid changes, which could have prevented the formation of life-essential carbon and oxygen?

What if the claim that 2-3 percent variation is not catastrophic is a way to introduce the "wiggle room" into the Anthopic Principle? What if the "wiggle room" must be introduced now that we know more about the fine-tuning that appears to link the biological energy of the sun to the biophysically constrained chemistry of protein folding and RNA-mediated cell type differentiation that links the conserved molecular mechanisms of biodiversity from microbes to man?
Whydening Gyre
4.2 / 5 (10) Jan 19, 2015
Not your usual room for your absurd dissertations, James...
However, if you must... the "wiggle room" you mention is WHY stuff works... If we didn't have it, the Universes criterion for existence would be too stringent...
And - it reading it again, your statement sounds more or less like word salad mumbo-gumbo...
JVK
1 / 5 (6) Jan 19, 2015
WHY stuff works...


Agreed. "Life is physics and chemistry and communication" http://dx.doi.org...as.12570 When you separate physics, chemistry, and communication, you can make it appear that molecules automagically evolved into life because there was precisely the amount of "wiggle room" that enabled them to individually do so, NATURALLY.

Thanks for explaining the magic of evolution in the context of the Universe's criterion for existence.

Have you considered this fact?

"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."
http://www.nature...306.html

They seem to be claiming there is no explanation for the amount of "wiggle room" that was just reintroduced into a "theory of everything."
Uncle Ira
4.3 / 5 (12) Jan 19, 2015
Re: "Variations in the light quark masses of up to 2-3 percent are unlikely to be catastrophic to the formation of life-essential carbon and oxygen," he concludes."

Could the variations be blah blah blah?


Oh boy, now the stinky love potions are part of the BIG bang theoryizing? P'tit boug, you are the weird man you.
JVK
1 / 5 (7) Jan 19, 2015
Not your usual room for your absurd dissertations, James...


I'm here because the biologically uniformed still cannot understand the levels of biological organization required to link the epigenetic landscape to the physical landscape of DNA in the organized genomes of species from microbes to man.

Rather than attribute science idiocy to their failure to understand the RNA-mediated chemistry of protein folding, I decided to attack the problem at its source: biophysical constraints.

It makes no sense to try and tell anyone that all biological energy comes from the sun when they still think that "...genomic conservation and constraint-breaking mutation is the ultimate source of all biological innovations and the enormous amount of biodiversity in this world." (p. 199) http://www.amazon...99661731

See for comparison: Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model. http://www.ncbi.n...24693353
claudius8787
1 / 5 (1) Jan 19, 2015
If the formation process is a closed cycle, then it stands to reason that the fundamental parameters are inherently constrained.

So far as we have been able to ascertain - it isn't...
We just WANT it to be...

"Want" is irrelevant. The evidence indicates a knifes edge of fundamental parameters is in play in our universe. Either you believe the anything is possible theory- or you accept what the evidence is telling us. Not sure what you mean by "so far as we have been able to ascertain".
SoylentGrin
5 / 5 (5) Jan 19, 2015
The universe has numbers that allow for life.
Conditions are favorable for life to be here on Earth.
So why is anyone surprised that life is here?

100% of universes you could find yourself in have numbers similar to this one. 100% isn't long odds, it's a sure thing.
Want a miracle? Show me life where conditions don't support it being there. Then you might have magic on your hands.
Want a universe that was purposely designed for life? Then you'll need a stronger example than one where 99.99999999999999% (being generous) of the space available doesn't snuff out life in less than a heartbeat.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (12) Jan 19, 2015
The foundation of christianity is responsibility to the people and individual freedom of choice and conscience
Where in the bible does it say this? Where does it say that xians will respect the beliefs of other faiths?

It doesnt. It says just the opposite. Xian values begin with the edict 'No other gods before me.'

THE ONLY REASON xians and for that matter any other religionists tolerate the existence of other religions is because they are FORCED to, by secularists. It is against biblical teachings to tolerate the existence of other religions, and certainly of the completely godless.

Joshua didnt get the job done so god sent gideon.

What makes you think that if xians got hold of govt they wouldnt start restricting the rights of heathens? They always have. Jesus was no egalitarian.

Your belief that a xian govt would be a superior govt stems from your belief that it is a superior religion. But it is the same as all the rest. 'Believe or rot in hell.'
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (11) Jan 19, 2015
We do not talk about religion. We talk about faith. You can try to make difference
This is because you believe there is only one true religion. All the others are a dangerous waste of time. They all in turn believe the same thing about yours.

And since it is the salvation of your everlasting soul which is at stake, the commitment is not arbitrary. It is something that you would kill and die for to preserve.

The bible agrees with you, and provides ample instruction on murder and martyrdom. It DEMANDS these things in defense of your faith.

So sell your cloak and buy a sword. Sooner or later you will need it, to defend your faith against others whose books tell them to do the very same thing.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (11) Jan 19, 2015
What makes you think that sane people would want people who think like this, in charge of their government? Millions have died to wrest power away from people who think like this. This country was founded on the principle that people who think like this, would never be in control of govt again.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.2 / 5 (10) Jan 19, 2015
Any lunatic can claim that God is with him and fulfill his will
Including the jew-hating, catholic-hating, reason-hating, Luther. Luther was responsible for the Thirty Years War during which the population of Germany shrank by 1/3.
JVK
1 / 5 (6) Jan 19, 2015
Sweet! Deep-Space Sugars May Reveal Clues About Origins of Life
http://www.space....ife.html

"Prior research had found that cosmic rays and ultraviolet radiation can help convert the chemicals that make up the bulk of these interstellar ices into complex organic matter, such as the precursors of proteins and fats."

It also showed that water molecules slow down the passage of light to allow the formation of amino acids that differentiate all cell types of all individuals of all species on this planet.

However, if these biologically uninformed science idiots can convince you to believe the amino acids first formed in deep space, they can probably convince you to believe in any other nonsense they want to keep touting.
Whydening Gyre
4 / 5 (8) Jan 19, 2015
They seem to be claiming there is no explanation for the precise amount of "wiggle room" that was just reintroduced into a "theory of everything."

It's not precise. If it was, it wouldn't be wiggle room. Stop semantically abusing...
Uncle Ira
4.1 / 5 (13) Jan 19, 2015
However, if these biologically uninformed science idiots can convince you to believe the amino acids first formed in deep space,


So where did the ones they found in space come from Skippy? They had to come from somewhere.

they can probably convince you to believe in any other nonsense they want to keep touting.


You mean like the stinky love potions that fell out of the BIG bang? For someone spending so much time telling everybody how what they think is idiot stuffs, you sure haven't been able to say much about what is right.

Where we come from Skippy? Start at the beginning, don't just jump into the stinky love potions stuff, like nutritious aromaphones controlling the whatever is you love to repeat. What came first before them and how did the ball get start rolling?
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 19, 2015
Near-Infrared Laser-Induced Structural Changes of Glycine·Water Complexes in an Ar Matrix

http://dx.doi.org...p508493c

"...irradiation of the first overtone of the OH stretching mode of glycine as well as of the first overtone of the OH stretching mode of the water molecule in the complex can induce structural changes."

Random mutations lead to information loss and no organisms arise.

Hydrogen-Tunneling in Biologically Relevant Small Molecules: The Rotamerizations of α-Ketocarboxylic Acids http://dx.doi.org...p503633m

"The conversion rates sensitively depend on the choice of matrix material and the tunneling half-lives range from a few hours to several days and are higher in Ne than in Ar for glyoxylic, pyruvic, and cyclopropylglyoxylic acid."

Differences in atmospheric water molecules and conversion rates lead to information gain and presumably to amino acid substitutions that stabilize protein folding. Organisms arise and adapt or die.
OZGuy
5 / 5 (9) Jan 20, 2015
Ira
Where we come from Skippy?

Didn't you know? JVK's god made us all the same. Then a bit like Alice (the Wonderland one NOT the Cooper one) we ate stuff that made us different Some ate tall smelly stuff, some short smelly stuff etc until we all looked/smelled different and so different we need JVK to sell us love smelly stuff to meet people in order to make more people.
Whydening Gyre
4.3 / 5 (11) Jan 20, 2015
Organisms arise and adapt or die.

Wow... That sounds dangerously like "natural selection"...
Changin' yer mind, JVK?
Vietvet
4.3 / 5 (12) Jan 20, 2015
Lets see Jamie K spin this study on beneficial mutations.

http://phys.org/n...nce.html
Uncle Ira
4.1 / 5 (13) Jan 20, 2015
Differences in atmospheric water molecules and conversion rates lead to information gain and presumably to amino acid substitutions that stabilize protein folding. Organisms arise and adapt or die.


I take him that you are not going to answer my question, eh Cher?

It was the easy question so when you answer with gobbledygook it means you are such the science idiot you could not answer ol Ira-Skippy's easy question. Because Ira-Skippy is the real science idiot and if you can't answer my question, you are in BIG trouble when it comes to the science idiot scale of things.
Whydening Gyre
3.9 / 5 (7) Jan 20, 2015
They seem to be claiming there is no explanation for the precise amount of "wiggle room" that was just reintroduced into a "theory of everything."

It's not precise. If it was, it wouldn't be wiggle room. Stop semantically abusing...

I meant to add "yerself" after the abusing...
kochevnik
5 / 5 (7) Jan 20, 2015
@ghost It doesnt. It says just the opposite. Xian values begin with the edict 'No other gods before me.'
Note that edict is an admission that other gods exist, not only their favorite one!
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 20, 2015
There is no experimental evidence of mutation-driven evolution in species from crustaceans to insects http://www.scienc...20.short and none in species from yeasts to other mammals. http://www.hawaii...ion.html

Given the fact that all biological energy comes from the sun, what do the science idiots here claim led to the biodiversity manifested in the morphological and behavioral phenotypes of species from microbes to man?
Uncle Ira
4.3 / 5 (11) Jan 20, 2015
Given the fact that all biological energy comes from the sun, what do the science idiots here claim led to the biodiversity manifested in the morphological and behavioral phenotypes of species from microbes to man?


That's what we have been trying to get you to tell us Skippy. Where is all comes from. If you don't know, just say so and we'll quit asking you.
anonymous_9001
5 / 5 (9) Jan 20, 2015
There is no experimental evidence of mutation-driven evolution


Except for that evidence I gave you yesterday and all the other evidence I've ever given you.

See the 3 papers at the end of this page:

http://www.homolo...tionism/
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 20, 2015
I've linked to the article many times. http://discoverma...volution

I've repeatedly placed it into the following context: "Others maintain that as random mutations arise, complexity emerges as a side effect, even without natural selection to help it along. Complexity, they say, is not purely the result of millions of years of fine-tuning through natural selection—the process that Richard Dawkins famously dubbed "the blind watchmaker." To some extent, it just happens." http://www.scient...plexity/

If experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect supported Nei's claims, he would not have concluded that "...genomic conservation and constraint-breaking mutation is the ultimate source of all biological innovations and the enormous amount of biodiversity in this world." (p. 199) http://www.amazon...99661731
Vietvet
4.6 / 5 (10) Jan 20, 2015
There is no experimental evidence of mutation-driven evolution in species from crustaceans to insects http://www.scienc...20.short

Given the fact that all biological energy comes from the sun, what do the science idiots here claim led to the biodiversity manifested in the morphological and behavioral phenotypes of species from microbes to man?


Is Jamie K goning to address the study on beneficial mutations?

http://phys.org/n...nce.html

Whydening Gyre
4.6 / 5 (11) Jan 20, 2015
There is no experimental evidence of mutation-driven evolution in species from crustaceans to insects

Doesn't sound like what you said in another article...
Ecological variation that leads to mutations either allows them to be maintained when they are not too detrimental to cell function or they are eliminated ...

Read more at: http://phys.org/n...html#jCp

Busted...
anonymous_9001
5 / 5 (9) Jan 20, 2015
2 experiments determining fitness effects and fixation of beneficial mutations:

http://www.geneti...17.short
http://www.ncbi.n...3913886/
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 20, 2015
"The Fates of Mutant Lineages and the Distribution of Fitness Effects of Beneficial Mutations in Laboratory Budding Yeast Populations'

REFUTATION:
Signaling Crosstalk: Integrating Nutrient Availability and Sex http://www.ncbi.n...3932994/

Evolvability and robustness in populations of RNA virus Φ6

REFUTATION
Amino Acid Substitutions in Polymerase Basic Protein 2 Gene Contribute to the Pathogenicity of the Novel A/H7N9 Influenza Virus in Mammalian Hosts http://jvi.asm.or...abstract

The links that science idiot Andrew Jones (aka anonymous_9001) provide invariably are to works that exemplify pseudoscientific nonsense, or that he meaningfully interprets.

Anyone who does not yet realize that "Feedback loops link odor and pheromone signaling with reproduction" http://www.scienc...05009815 has been trapped in ridiculous theories for at least the past decade.
anonymous_9001
5 / 5 (11) Jan 20, 2015
Your lack of reading comprehension comes back to bite you again.

REFUTATION:
Signaling Crosstalk: Integrating Nutrient Availability and Sex


That's about pheromones and nutrients altering gene EXPRESSION. That has nothing to do with refuting beneficial mutations.

REFUTATION
Amino Acid Substitutions in Polymerase Basic Protein 2 Gene...


From the abstract:

We characterized the activity of polymerase complexes with these PB2 mutations and found that they enhance the polymerase activity in human 293T cells. The rescued mutants enhanced growth in mammalian cells in vitro.


This study actually supports me. It's the same as the two I posted. They did experiments to see what those mutations did and it turns out they were beneficial and enhanced pathogenecity. You're doing my work for me.
Maggnus
4.9 / 5 (9) Jan 20, 2015
Your lack of reading comprehension comes back to bite you again.
It actually surprises me how often this happens to the stinky love-potion seller. Like linking to an article about mutations, then saying that there is no evidence of mutations. It's almost like he doesn't wish to understand..........
Whydening Gyre
4.3 / 5 (12) Jan 20, 2015
Your lack of reading comprehension comes back to bite you again.
It actually surprises me how often this happens to the stinky love-potion seller. Like linking to an article about mutations, then saying that there is no evidence of mutations. It's almost like he doesn't wish to understand..........

Mag,
He understands. He's just search-mining.
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 20, 2015
...they were beneficial and enhanced pathogenecity.


Enhanced pathogenicity via amino acid substitutions benefits the virus via increased thermodynamic stability of protein folding.

Same thing with E.coli and the change to E. coli 0157. http://dx.doi.org...2014.242

Same thing with all species from microbes to man http://www.pnas.o...abstract
"Another type of cis-acting sequence is RNA thermometers, which control temperature-dependent translation of proteins (8). RNA thermometers such as the ROSE element are typically found within the 5′ UTR of heat shock protein genes; ROSE prevents translation until heat shock temperature, by sequestration of the SD sequence through basepairing
(23)."

Forget the laws of physics and the chemistry of protein folding, and forget conserved molecular mechanisms.

What's left?

The pseudoscientific nonsense of evolutionary theory.
rockwolf1000
5 / 5 (8) Jan 21, 2015
There is no experimental evidence of mutation-driven evolution in species from crustaceans to insects...and none in species from yeasts to other mammals.


and none in species from yeasts to other mammals.?

Now I know you're crazy.

Did you ever see the movie A Beautiful Mind? http://en.wikiped...d_(film)

They wrote that about you and just changed the story a bit. Poor you.

Beyond bonkers crazy!

Do tell us at which hospital you're kept. Perhaps we could help convince your doctors to reconsider your meds. Clearly they're ineffective.
anonymous_9001
5 / 5 (10) Jan 21, 2015
Pathogenicity of E. coli 0157 has nothing to do with its temperature stability. It's pathogenic because it produces Stx-2, which shuts down protein synthesis of infected cells.
mooster75
4 / 5 (4) Jan 21, 2015
They seem to be claiming there is no explanation for the precise amount of "wiggle room" that was just reintroduced into a "theory of everything."

It's not precise. If it was, it wouldn't be wiggle room. Stop semantically abusing...

I meant to add "yerself" after the abusing...

It's okay; it was implied.
goldenratio
1 / 5 (4) Jan 21, 2015
I'm not sure how the sequencing in atomic nuclei's orbitals and orbital partials can be derived from Anthropic principles, but there are things one might want to consider. In spherical nuclei, under a simple harmonic oscillator-only model, ALL the magic numbers (where shells are full, akin to electronic nobility, so resisting adding or subtracting nucleons) are exactly doubled tetrahedral numbers (as in the (value doubled) Pascal Triangle). The doubling seems to derive from particle pairing for spin, which is immediate for the nucleons when partners are available (in the electronic system all orbital lobes fill singly with electrons before they start to double up in the second half of the orbital).

goldenratio
1 / 5 (4) Jan 21, 2015
This Pascal motif continues, in the harmonic oscillator model, for deformed nuclei. When deformation is expressed in terms of the oscillator ratio, then the sphere (as default ellipsoid) has doubled tetrahedral magic numbers, which of necessity have double triangular number intervals (as demanded by Pascal math). This is oscillator ratio of 1:1. When the ratio is 2:1, then we get TWO copies of each doubled triangular number interval in succession, so 2,2,6,6,12,12,20,20,30,30,42,42... leading to magics 2,4,10,16,28,40,60,80,110,140... and so on. For denominator 1 and natural number numerators (all prolate nuclei) the numerator determines the number of copies of each doubled triangular numbers leading in succession to magics. No exceptions. For oblate nuclei with numerator 1 and denominators as natural numbers, the denominator tells you how many magic numbers are needed to give double triangular intervals between them.
goldenratio
1 / 5 (4) Jan 21, 2015
So for the sphere (again the default ellipsoid), there is a double triangular interval between every magic number, but for an oscillator ratio of 1:2 there is such an interval between EVERY OTHER magic number, for 1:3 between EVERY THIRD, and so on. The only exceptions occur at the very beginnings of magic sequences when we haven't yet accumulated as many magics as the denominator- here the magics are all exactly double triangular. This implies that at infinite oblate deformation all magics are double triangular. For more complex oscillator ratios BOTH numerator and denominator effects come into play. For the harmonic oscillator-only model of the nucleus there are no exceptions. More realistic models of the nucleus including spin-orbit and deformed potential well corrections to the Hamiltonian also show significant Pascal Triangle related behaviors, but these are organized differently.
goldenratio
1 / 5 (4) Jan 21, 2015
An example here- spin orbit coupling splits orbitals into two parts, differing by two in particle counts (so p goes to p3/2 with 4 particles, and p1/2 with 2, d to d5/2 with 6 particles and d3/2 with 4, and so on- there may also be the implication (controversial) that s goes to s1/2 with two particles and s-1/2 (- not referring to up/down spin here but to numeracy) with zero particles. Spin-orbit coupling reduces the larger part in energy because the particle spins align with the orbit, and increases the smaller part because they don't align. After a certain point in shell structure building the energy reduction is sufficient to cause the larger part of the broken orbital to be inserted into the shell prior to the one it is naturally home to in the harmonic oscillator model. It turns out that these 'intruder' levels always terminate, in terms of particle count, a spin-orbit magic number minus a double triangular number.
goldenratio
1 / 5 (4) Jan 21, 2015
So, 50-2=48 for 1g9/2, with 10 nucleons, so starting at 39, 82-6=76 for 1h11/2, with 12 nucleons, starting at 65, 126-12=114 for 1i13/2, with 14 nucleons, starting at 101, and so on. Interestingly when the sizes of the intruder orbital partials are taken as the (value doubled) Pascal natural numbers, they are in the same row, and right beside the sizes of the period analogues they dip into. Prior to the effects of spin-orbit splitting, the sizes of all the period analogues in the harmonic oscillator model are, because of parity sorting, exactly double triangular numbers in size. So s=2, p=6, ds=12, fp=20, gds=30, etc. So the math is perfect relative to the Pascal system. The question we have to ask is WHY?
Uncle Ira
4.1 / 5 (9) Jan 21, 2015
The question we have to ask is WHY?


Okayeei, I'll snap at him Cher. WHY?
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 21, 2015
Pathogenicity of E. coli 0157 has nothing to do with its temperature stability.


http://www.wsj.co...pStories

"President Barack Obama called for a new medical research push in his State of the Union address, which the White House says will include fighting antibiotic resistance and the pursuit of targeted therapy based on a patient's genetic makeup."

Will someone please tell him that the biologically uninformed defy all attempts to make scientific progress by claiming that antibiotic resistance arises due to mutations and that mutations lead to the evolution of differences in cell types of all cells in all individuals of all species?

Why can't pseudoscientists understand the fact that "Life is physics and chemistry and communication" http://dx.doi.org...as.12570 and that 'conditions of life' are nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled via RNA-mediated events?
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (11) Jan 21, 2015
@ghost It doesnt. It says just the opposite. Xian values begin with the edict 'No other gods before me.'
Note that edict is an admission that other gods exist, not only their favorite one!
Yah including his wife.

"God had a wife, Asherah, whom the Book of Kings suggests was worshiped alongside Yahweh in his temple in Israel, according to an Oxford scholar. In 1967, Raphael Patai was the first historian to mention that the ancient Israelites worshiped both Yahweh and Asherah."

-Now he's only got a mother.
anonymous_9001
5 / 5 (11) Jan 21, 2015
President Barack Obama...


Stay focused, Kohl. That is quite possibly the least relevant response you've given anyone. We're talking about pathogenicity and then you bust out some unrelated bit about Obama.
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 21, 2015
Arguably, the claims that antibiotic resistance arises via mutations are the most irrelevant claims to ever be made by pseudoscientists who do not understand anything about nutrient-dependent cell type differentiation. It should not take an Act of Congress to force evolutionary theorists to start making sense of biologically-based cause and effect.

Probably, all it will take is for the NIH to quit funding research that does not include what is currently known about physics and chemistry, but proceeds to attempt to address questions that require knowledge of how metabolic networks and genetic networks must be linked to patient outcomes.

For example, see this brief video representation of results from "Clinically Actionable Genotypes Among 10,000 Patients With Preemptive Pharmacogenomic Testing"
https://www.youtu...G_9EEeeA
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 21, 2015
See also: "Ideal Negative Measurements in Quantum Walks Disprove Theories Based on Classical Trajectories" and the news report at http://physics.ap...les/v8/6

Excerpt: "The next step is to try these experiments with atoms of larger mass, superposed over longer time scales and separated by greater distances. This will push the envelope of macroscopicity further and reveal yet more about the nature of the relationship between the quantum and the macroworld."

My comment: Obviously, those who are ready to take the next step have already left evolutionary theorists far behind. This news was reported on the same day as the State of the Union address. See the comment by Andrew Jones above:
We're talking about pathogenicity and then you bust out some unrelated bit about Obama.


His mutagenesis experiments reveal nothing that's known about physics, chemistry, or life. But he claims my comment is irrelevant because he is biologically uninformed.
Uncle Ira
4 / 5 (8) Jan 21, 2015
For example, see this brief video representation of results from "Clinically Actionable Genotypes Among 10,000 Patients With Preemptive Pharmacogenomic Testing"


Well JVK-Skippy you finally post something I liked. But it does not show what happens after the tree bursted into flames. What did he do after that because it's looks like he was still holding the other tree? Is there a next part two?
anonymous_9001
5 / 5 (9) Jan 21, 2015
Even more irrelevant tangents and deflecting. Surprise, surprise.

Again:

Pathogenicity of E. coli 0157 has nothing to do with its temperature stability. It's pathogenic because it produces Stx-2, which shuts down protein synthesis of infected cells.
rockwolf1000
5 / 5 (8) Jan 21, 2015
See also: "Ideal Negative Measurements in Quantum Walks Disprove Theories Based on Classical Trajectories" and the news report at http://physics.ap...les/v8/6

My comment: Obviously, those who are ready to take the next step have already left evolutionary theorists far behind. This news was reported on the same day as the State of the Union address. See the comment by Andrew Jones above:
We're talking about pathogenicity and then you bust out some unrelated bit about Obama.


His mutagenesis experiments reveal nothing that's known about physics, chemistry, or life. But he claims my comment is irrelevant because he is biologically uninformed.


Perhaps he thinks your comment is irrelevant because you think yeasts are mammals.
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 21, 2015
Synthetic circuit allows dialing gene expression up or down in human cells http://medicalxpr...man.html

Excerpt: "Once you know it works in yeast, you know the steps to make it function in human cells. This process is similar to extensive testing of NASA's space operations on Earth before actually carrying them out in space."

My comment:

(yeasts) Signaling Crosstalk: Integrating Nutrient Availability and Sex http://www.ncbi.n...3932994/

(mammals) Feedback loops link odor and pheromone signaling with reproduction
http://www.ncbi.n...16290036

Obviously, anyone who thinks that yeasts mutated and evolved into mammals should supply experimental evidence to support their claims.

They need not be rocket scientists to recognize the requirement to link physics to chemistry and biology. But they MUST be serious scientists, not science idiots -- like Andrew Jones, and most others here.
Whydening Gyre
3.9 / 5 (7) Jan 21, 2015
Golden ratio,
As an artist, I have a fair understanding vision of, well, pretty much most things...
And your description pretty much describes a bowl of spaghetti. In a sauce that I'm not sure of...
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Jan 21, 2015
http://www.scienc...3640.htm

Excerpt: The enzyme Luxl produces signals that are recognised by the LuxR receptor, at which point the bacteria develop certain properties and modulate their behaviour towards one another. Since a certain number of bacteria must be available for this to occur, this process is known as "quorum sensing."

Quorum sensing is nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled, which links it from microbes to

1) Signaling Crosstalk: Integrating Nutrient Availability and Sex
and to
2) Feedback loops link odor and pheromone signaling with reproduction
and to everything else I have detailed about cell type differentiation during the past 20 years in a series of published works.
Captain Stumpy
4.5 / 5 (8) Jan 21, 2015
Not everyone who considers himself a christian really is
@ren
actually, none of the people professing to be "christians" are christians, and this is easily proved by the failure to:
-accept and adhere to every single commandment
-follow the faith as dictated in the bible (and be "christ" like)
-because all "christians" divide themselves into sects (or beliefs), they cannot logically be considered "christian" by default as the sect then defines the rules of behavior, and there is no adherence to the basic tenets because of the belief that they can "be" without following the rules

ALL religions are man made and their primary purpose is CONTROL, not love or anything else
they are, by definition, designed to segregate, cause friction and prejudice and control the populace through means of fear and pressure
Captain Stumpy
4.5 / 5 (8) Jan 21, 2015
anyone who thinks that yeasts mutated and evolved into mammals should supply experimental evidence to support their claims.
but jk,
you are promoting a model that causes mutations, so where is your evidence of beneficial mutation per your model?

His mutagenesis experiments reveal nothing that's known about physics, chemistry, or life. But he claims my comment is irrelevant because he is biologically uninformed.
ROTFLMFAO
you should take up comedy

actually, he has already DEMONSTRATED that you do NOT comprehend the physics and the biology behind even your OWN comments

He is educated and knowledgeable, whereas you are a crackpot selling stinky love potions to horny teens and lying about mutations and your model
JVK
1 / 5 (6) Jan 21, 2015
Note: The science idiot, Captain Stumpy is no longer claiming that Extavour's comments refuted my claims. He has changed his attack strategy, but it is no less ridiculous than attacks by anyone else who refuses to address the experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect that links physics and chemistry.

Taken together works on signalling and sensing refute the pseudoscientific nonsense about mutations and evolution by placing life as physics, chemistry, and information into the context of the biologically-based communication of information that is required for transfer among individuals and species. See my comment to Science at http://comments.s....1242782

All organisms must signal and sense, and signalling and sensing are nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled. Information enables cell type differentiation, mutations perturb it. That's what makes claims of mutation-driven evolution utterly ridiculous.
rockwolf1000
5 / 5 (8) Jan 21, 2015
@JVK

Obviously, anyone who thinks that yeasts mutated and evolved into mammals should supply experimental evidence to support their claims.


No one said that, and obviously you don't believe that yeasts mutated into mammals because you think they ARE mammals.

Another monumental error from JVK.
Captain Stumpy
4.5 / 5 (8) Jan 21, 2015
Captain Stumpy is no longer claiming that Extavour's comments refuted my claims
i don't need to, moron
You are posting PSEUDOSCIENCE
Dr. Extavour posts ACTUAL science... there is a huge difference
Why the sudden interest in the Doc?
she is not your type- she is intelligent and will not fall for the stinky love potion crap you pass off as science
He has changed his attack strategy
at least you didn't change
you are still attacking actual science with blatant stupidity and a failure to comprehend your own field

as proven by ANON above
refute the pseudoscientific nonsense about mutations and evolution
you still have not demonstrated/proven this comment
in fact, by simple explanation, you promote your own model as an answer but that simply puts it back into the "MUTATION" category and into the realm of Evolution, which you are too stupid to comprehend

i am enjoying watching Anon trounce you
Captain Stumpy
4.5 / 5 (8) Jan 21, 2015
Information enables cell type differentiation, mutations perturb it. That's what makes claims of mutation-driven evolution utterly ridiculous.
so, per your definition of "utterly ridiculous" here... then YOUR OWN MODEL is utterly ridiculous

! remember when I asked
DOES your model make any changes to the nucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism, virus, or extrachromosomal genetic element?
This is a yes or no answer
(this is the DEFINITION of mutation) to which you answered
YES!
--Thanks for asking
so continuing to denigrate mutations only means you are calling yourself STUPID
actually, you are calling yourself "utterly ridiculous" because your model CAUSES MUTATIONS and therefore you are posting pseudoscience
JVK
1 / 5 (6) Jan 21, 2015
...continuing to denigrate mutations only means you are calling yourself STUPID


Continuing to denigrate works whose authors incorporate de Vries ridiculous definition of "mutation" will provide me with a sense of purpose until those who might otherwise have been led to become science idiots begin to emphatically challenge the assumptions of those who have already been taught to be science idiots by the science idiots who will not be allowed to teach another generation.

Serious scientists have been linking physics to chemistry and conserved molecular mechanisms of cell type differentiation via chromatin remodeling as we did in our 1996 Hormones and Behavior review. They have realized that they are becoming the majority and are publishing clear refutations of theories -- even though the refutations are not clear to science idiots.

See also: http://www.scienc...88.short
Whydening Gyre
4 / 5 (8) Jan 21, 2015
ALL religions are man made and their primary purpose is CONTROL, not love or anything else
they are, by definition, designed to segregate, cause friction and prejudice and control the populace through means of fear and pressure.

Excellent "review", Cap'n.
I would like to offer an additional, (oftentimes over looked) social value of a "church" (regardless of religion);
As an "information networking" loci, inasmuch as church can often be the main social intercourse source for many people. They go to hear whispered rumours and pick up tips about this or that.
JVK
1 / 5 (6) Jan 21, 2015
(regardless of his religion) Church has created nutrient-dependent stability in a modified E. coli.

Concerns about mutations have been alleviated with reassurances that the amino acid stabilizes protein folding across "...a total of 1 trillion E. coli cells from various experiments, and after two weeks none had escaped."

http://www.scienc...5617.htm

Clearly, claims that Lenski's E. coli mutated and evolved can be compared in the context of mutagenesis experiments versus what is known to occur in the context of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled ecological adaptations via amino acid substitutions.

For example, see: http://medicalxpr...ion.html

"E. coli O157 is unable to attach itself to host tissue in high concentrations of D-Serine. Other strains, such as those that cause meningitis, thrive in the presence of the amino-acid."
Captain Stumpy
4.6 / 5 (9) Jan 21, 2015
de Vries ridiculous definition of "mutation"
and again, you blatantly lie and spread your own delusional belief
YOU are the only one using that definition
Dr. Extavour & Lenski have proven and demonstrated and supported the definition i gave while also giving experimental evidence supporting the claims of beneficial mutaitons
You are only arguing a failed semantics argument from the turn of the century, and it was not even accurate THEN, so it is far from being relevant or accurate now

and just because you can afford to TROLL post on ScienceMag doesn't make you any more legit than your TROLLING here does

you are NOT a scientist, you are a religious nut looking for someone to believe in your BS

social value of a "church"
@WGyre
actually, i leave that out intentionally, because not everyone who goes to church is religious nor are they a faithful follower of a belief
Whydening Gyre
4.2 / 5 (5) Jan 22, 2015
social value of a "church"
@WGyre
actually, i leave that out intentionally, because not everyone who goes to church is religious nor are they a faithful follower of a belief

No offense taken, Cap'n. I used "church" in the context of "watering hole" or general gathering place...
JVK
1 / 5 (6) Jan 22, 2015
http://www.plantp...abstract]http://www.plantp...abstract[/url]

"Light is an important environmental signal that is directly perceived by the plant through photoreceptors and is essential for driving photosynthesis. As such, light provides the reducing power for carbon fixation, nitrogen assimilation, amino acid biosynthesis, and other necessary metabolic pathways. Information about light quality, intensity, and duration is measured through numerous photoreceptors (Mancinelli, 1994; Smith, 1994). Phytochromes are the primary red-light photoreceptors."

http://www.plantp...abstract]http://www.plantp...abstract[/url] "The influence on the pathogenic properties of the bacteria is at its strongest in this 'quorum sensing' system. P. asymbiotica requires dialkylresorcinol and in this way coordinates the communication with the conspecifics..." This links biosynthesis of the new signal molecule to microbial luminescence in squid / microbe symbiosis.
Losik
Jan 23, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 23, 2015
The Big Bang cosmology industry and the evolution industry have teamed up to present the most ridiculous misrepresentations of biologically based cause and effect that any serious scientist could imagine. 'Bangers' tout physics; evolutionists tout biology. Both teams exclude biochemists.

(BANG!) First molecules evolve then they arrive on earth. They seed life that EVOLVES.

The changes in biological energies, which are required for life's chemistry to exist are not considered in thought experiments or in this experiment by Brian Cox. He concludes that cosmic rays may cause beneficial mutations to DNA that lead to evolution of biodiversity.

https://www.youtu...34#t=141

Look at comment 1)
Pathogenicity of E. coli 0157 has nothing to do with its temperature stability.


It comes from the same science idiot who does not believe in light-induced amino acid substitutions but believes in beneficial mutations.
rockwolf1000
5 / 5 (7) Jan 23, 2015
The Big Bang cosmology industry and the evolution industry have teamed up to present the most ridiculous misrepresentations of biologically based cause and effect that any serious scientist could imagine. 'Bangers' tout physics; evolutionists tout biology. Both teams exclude biochemists.

(BANG!) First molecules evolve then they arrive on earth. They seed life that EVOLVES.

The changes in biological energies, which are required for life's chemistry to exist are not considered in thought experiments or in this experiment by Brian Cox. He concludes that cosmic rays may cause beneficial mutations to DNA that lead to evolution of biodiversity.

Look at comment 1)
Pathogenicity of E. coli 0157 has nothing to do with its temperature stability.


It comes from the same science idiot who does not believe in light-induced amino acid substitutions but believes in beneficial mutations.


You're getting dumber by the day.
Maggnus
5 / 5 (8) Jan 23, 2015
This is like if shark would think, the marine water has adjusted density in such a way, the shark can swim in it without bladder. The anthropic principle belongs together with multiverse into modern metaphysics. The life can survive only very narrow zone of the Universe.Snip**In AWT the age of Universe is infinite, or at least http://www.techno...logists/ (actually it's just a salary generator for people involved).


Zephyr!! You're back! Took you a while this time, must be running out of socks or something hey?

AWT theory is still garbage pseudo-science by the way. And yes, your stupid idea that other planets are warming is still wrong. And no, there is still no evidence for a higher incidence of cosmic impacts on Jupiter or the sun.I imagine this sockpuppet will get banned shortly, so you better make your usual rant about how unfair science is quick!
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Jan 23, 2015
You're getting dumber by the day.


Thanks. Perhaps I should stop reading about news from scientists and let the science idiots like you teach me a thing or two about how to become one.

http://www.the-sc...itches-/

Excerpt from my comment:

"Amino acid substitutions alter the ability of organisms to communicate in symbiotic relationships that may lead to the physiopathology of organisms like "Enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli (EHEC) serotype O157:H7," which is responsible for outbreaks of bloody diarrhea.

Other microbes have beneficial or deleterious effects, but so far they do not appear to link mutations to evolution.except in science fiction novels and evolutionary theories."
rockwolf1000
5 / 5 (6) Jan 23, 2015
You're getting dumber by the day.


Thanks. Perhaps I should stop reading about news from scientists and let the science idiots like you teach me a thing or two about how to become one.


That's a great idea!

Perhaps then you could become a science idiot instead of being a science retard.

The idiot being preferable to the retard.
Whydening Gyre
4.5 / 5 (8) Jan 23, 2015
And why is JVK hijacking this one, too?
One answer - search mining.
Uncle Ira
3.9 / 5 (11) Jan 23, 2015
And why is JVK hijacking this one, too?
One answer - search mining.


I saw that when you said it the other day. I wasn't sure if it was the same thing as I was trying to tell the JVK-Skippy last week ago. So I looked him up and it is the same thing. I was asking JVK-Skippy if the reason he put that dependable nutritious aromaphonones thing in every post so the Google-Skippy would make him famous.

I tried to explain that the Google-Skippy was making him famous because if you put his thing into it Google-Skippy comes back with 300 or 200 linkums to him saying it. What he could not understand is what I told him that they were not so very flattering or anything to be proud of because almost all of them was peoples making him look like the couyon. And the really bad ones had him wearing his silly looking pointy cap and the goofy picture of him like he has on here. The one where it looks like somebody is tickling his toes while he is getting his picture took.
Whydening Gyre
4 / 5 (8) Jan 23, 2015
And I just got the word - My blood daughter is pregnant... Gonna be a real grandpa, not just through my step kids...

JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 24, 2015
Quantum harmonic oscillator, superposition model,duality
https://www.youtu...youtu.be

The link from "Cross-Species Affective Neuroscience Decoding of the Primal Affective Experiences of Humans and Related Animals" http://dx.doi.org....0021236 to

"A quantum theory for the irreplaceable role of docosahexaenoic acid in neural cell signalling throughout evolution" http://www.ncbi.n...23206328

in the context of my model is probably obvious to any serious scientists. I mention it here so that the links across disciplines can be dismissed by the science idiots who continue to contribute their mindless comments.

Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model. http://www.ncbi.n...24693353
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 24, 2015
if you put his thing into it Google-Skippy comes back with 300 or 200 linkums to him saying it. What he could not understand is what I told him that they were not so very flattering or anything to be proud of ...


See also: Human Pheromones: Integrating Neuroendocrinology and Ethology http://cogprints.org/2164/ Cited 83 times (per scholar.google.com)

"The effect of sensory input on hormones is essential to any explanation of mammalian behavior, including aspects of physical attraction. The chemical signals we send have direct and developmental effects on hormone levels in other people. Since we don't know either if, or how, visual cues might have direct and developmental effects on hormone levels in other people, the biological basis for the development of visually perceived human physical attraction is currently somewhat questionable. In contrast, the biological basis for the development o of physical attraction based on chemical signals is well detailed."
Whydening Gyre
3.9 / 5 (8) Jan 24, 2015
Unfortunately, you leave out the part about how humans shower, wear clothes, use perfumes, etc. Thus leaving visual cues as the initial primary. Followed by clever conversation...
And what was your point with the quantum oscillation vid, again?
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 24, 2015
humans shower, wear clothes, use perfumes, etc. Thus leaving visual cues as the initial primary.


Re: quantum oscillation:

Science idiots continue to think that what they see is most important, because they cannot grasp the facts that have been experimentally established by physicists, chemists, and molecular biologists who cannot simply claim that "what you see is what you get" when all experimental evidence supports an atoms to ecosystems model exemplified in the latest work that comes from Church: http://www.nature...121.html and from Christ: http://www.ncbi.n...3698935/

When was the last time you read anything about their works? Taken together Christ and Church link light-induced amino acid substitutions from protein biosynthesis and degradation via metabolic networks and genetic networks, which are linked to rejuvenation via heterochronic parabiosis (exchange of blood for life).
Captain Stumpy
4.6 / 5 (9) Jan 24, 2015
And I just got the word - My blood daughter is pregnant... Gonna be a real grandpa, not just through my step kids...
@WGyre
HEY! CONGRATULATIONS!
you go, man! you can e-mail me my cigar! i prefer Cuban ones LMFAO

Perhaps I should stop reading about news from scientists and let the science idiots like you teach me a thing or two about how to become one
well, you are not learning it anywhere else... and you never learned the basics and you have not demonstrated the capability to comprehend the science so far

you know, little kohlslaw, you've been taught a LOT of legitimate science right here on PO over the past few years but you seem to ignore it because you think you are better than they are

guess what
you're not
i can prove it
Science idiots continue to think that what they see is most important
wrong again
we think what you can demonstrate (via repeated peer reviewed studies/experiments) is important
Not misinterpretations like you give
Whydening Gyre
4.4 / 5 (7) Jan 24, 2015
humans shower, wear clothes, use perfumes, etc. Thus leaving visual cues as the initial primary.


Re: quantum oscillation:

Science idiots continue to think that what they see is most important, because they cannot grasp the facts that have been experimentally established by physicists, chemists, and molecular biologists who cannot simply claim that "what you see is what you get" when all experimental evidence supports an atoms to ecosystems model exemplified in the latest work that comes from Church: http://www.nature...121.html

When was the last time you read anything about their works? Taken together Christ and Church link light-induced amino acid substitutions from protein biosynthesis and degradation via metabolic networks and genetic networks, which are linked to rejuvenation via heterochronic parabiosis (exchange of blood for life).

Ahhh... vampires, then.
You really do need to get out more....
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 24, 2015
Biocontainment of genetically modified organisms by synthetic protein design http://www.nature...121.html

The authors detail how ecological variation is linked from atoms to ecosystems via nutrient-dependent amino acid substitutions that stabilize protein folding, which they compare to mutations that perturb protein folding.

They attest to the limited probability that mutations will lead to the escape from biophysical constraints that link the nutrient-dependent amino acid substitutions to the pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction in species from microbes to man via conserved molecular mechanisms.

Simply put, they refute all claims of mutation-driven evolution with experimental evidence of epigenetically effected nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled RNA-mediated DNA stability in the organized genomes of their GMOs, and hope that science idiots will believe their experimental evidence.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (6) Jan 24, 2015
they refute all claims of mutation-driven evolution with experimental evidence
WOW!
so they refute YOUR MODEL too?

JVK
1.8 / 5 (5) Jan 24, 2015
My model links nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated cell type differentiation to the pheromone-controlled fixation of amino acid substitutions that differentiate all cell types of all individuals of all species.

Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model.
http://www.ncbi.n...24693353

Their refutation of ridiculous theories supports my detailed model at every level of investigation at the same time it attests to the pseudoscientific nonsense touted by biologically uninformed science idiots.

Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (7) Jan 24, 2015
My model
causes MUTATIONS
Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model
that uses MUTATIONS to show evolutionary progress, the same way that EVOLUTION THEORY shows that things can evolve due to mutations in the genome

if you want to be perfectly clear, you should have written your post like THIS
Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model that is the pseudoscientific nonsense touted by a biologically uninformed science idiot who failed in his education to learn the basics and still cannot comprehend that his model is NOT a replacement for Evolution Theory .
Proof of this is here: http://freethough...s-place/

Professor Myers knows how to spot the looney
and he called you out on it... proving that you are a fake who is touting creationist nonsense wrapped in obfuscating kohlslaw word salads of stupidity ignoring the basics of biology
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 24, 2015
PZ Myers challenged my claim that:

"Ecological adaptation occurs via the epigenetic effects of nutrients on alternative splicings of pre-mRNA which result in amino acid substitutions that differentiate all cell types of all individuals of all species. The control of the differences in cell types occurs via the metabolism of the nutrients to chemical signals that control the physiology of reproduction."

That claim has since been substantiated in every report that links physics, chemistry, and the conserved molecular mechanisms of cell type differentiation via amino acid substitutions in species from microbes to man. For example: Christ et al (2013) http://www.ncbi.n...3698935/ and Church's group (2015) http://www.nature...121.html have since supported all of the claims that I supported with examples in my model of ecological adaptations.

Only science idiots claim other science idiots proved anything.
russell_russell
5 / 5 (8) Jan 24, 2015
This is sad.
You have totally lost it.
Uncle Ira
4.3 / 5 (12) Jan 24, 2015
rofessor Myers knows how to spot the looney


I was going say maybe he would be good to sign up here on the physorg, but our looney-Skippy would not such a BIG challenge for him and he'd get bored with them. And he would think poor of us if he thought we needed help with couyons as silly as the ones we got hanging around here..
TechnoCreed
5 / 5 (8) Jan 25, 2015
@Vieux Ira
The only PhDs who spends their time arguing with Joe Public are the ones that are totally ignored and rejected by their peers. I said it before and will say it again, Phys.org is the PhD trash bin and you mon cher Ira are one heck of a shredding claw... Keep up your good work.

cont.
TechnoCreed
4.6 / 5 (9) Jan 25, 2015
PZ Myers on JVK
He crashes into a thread full of lay people and then lords it over them with his abuse of jargon. And he does it over and over again, and you can see the responses: most of the other commenters are more or less stunned, they don't know how to deal with all the specific buzzwords he throws at them, and they have these doubts…maybe he's saying something I should know about. No, he's not. He's babbling in scientese.
The funny part is that Myers had let Kohl freely comment on his blog until the later showed how much of a discriminatory bigot he was. For a good laugh go to comment number 317 ;-) http://freethough...s-place/
Captain Stumpy
4.6 / 5 (9) Jan 25, 2015
PZ Myers challenged my claim that
the funniest thing is how the idiot jimmyk cannot comprehend his own STUPIDITY
like his quite above... Myers doesn't "challenge" the claim, he EXPLAINED it
Basically what he's saying in the first couple of sentences is that the environment induces variations in gene expression that are responsible for the differentiation of the various cell types. This is partly true; environmental influences certainly do contribute to cells developing in different directions. However, there are many examples of patterns that resist environmental influences, or in which maternal factors shelter the embryo from the environment
this is the same problem little jk has with Anonymous and others too... he is so used to making this as obfuscated as possible with his stupidity that he doesn't comprehend clear, concise communication!
AND
he doesn't understand most of the lingo used by biologists/geneticists/medicine ANYWAY...

sorry jk
PZ is RIGHT
Uncle Ira
4.3 / 5 (11) Jan 25, 2015
@ Techno-Skippy there are some good ones on there. Here is one the ones I really liked a lot because it means the JVK-Skippy has promoted all of us science idiots up to the next grade.

this is the most ignorant group of people I have ever encountered.


Well maybe that is not so good, eh? If JVK-Skippy calls you ignorant it usually means you must have something big going for you.

But also yeah, he make the bigot remarks here too when he gets extra worked up and even slips into the creation-Skippy stuffs he usually shies away from.
JVK
1 / 5 (5) Jan 25, 2015
PZ Myers eliminated me from participation on the same day I posted the link that showed chromosomal rearrangements differentiated the cell types of a species with behavioral morphs that co-varied with their physical characteristics.

Estrogen receptor α polymorphism in a species with alternative behavioral phenotypes
http://www.pnas.o...abstract

We have since seen the same thing in humans with the variation linked to behavioral development from adolescence to adults.

Oppositional COMT Val158Met effects on resting state functional connectivity in adolescents and adults http://dx.doi.org...4-0895-5

The findings from humans exemplify cause and effect via the conserved molecular mechanisms I detailed in Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model. http://www.ncbi.n...24693353
anonymous_9001
5 / 5 (8) Jan 25, 2015
Are chromosomal rearrangements deliberate in your model? Are they induced because they have beneficial effects?
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (6) Jan 26, 2015
PZ Myers eliminated me from participation on the same day I posted
let me finish that for you... posted and proved that you were a bigot
so... why don't you ever clearly answer Anon's questions... he is only trying to simplify everything so that you can see your own fallacies and pseudoscience. You also like to ignore certain questions and then obfuscate others with irrelevant posts... why not be clear and concise? what is wrong with that? why do you FEAR being clear and posting concise information using the nomenclature of your field?

get back to answering Anon!
Are chromosomal rearrangements deliberate in your model? Are they induced because they have beneficial effects?
Uncle Ira
4.1 / 5 (9) Jan 26, 2015
@ JVK-Skippy. How you are Skippy? I'm doing tippy top today, thanks for asking.

I still have the same question that you have forget to answer. What the heck does the nutricous dependable aromamones have to do with the starting numbers of the universe? I see you are still real fond of putting that in every postum or almost every postum
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Jan 26, 2015
posted and proved that you were a bigot


He proved his ignorance. One of my award-winning published works linked homosexual and heterosexual orientation via the same model, and I included what was known about model organisms. PZ Myers accused me of being a homophobe.

Simon LeVay placed my model into its proper context on page 210 of "Gay, Straight, and the Reason Why: The Science of Sexual Orientation"

"This model is attractive in that it solves the "binding problem" of sexual attraction. By that I mean the problem of why all the different features of men or women (visual appearance and feel of face, body, and genitals; voice quality, smell; personality and behavior, etc.) attract people as a more or less coherent package representing one sex, rather than as an arbitrary collage of male and female characteristics. If all these characteristics come to be attractive because they were experienced in association with a male- or female-specific pheromone..."
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Jan 26, 2015
Re: Comment 299 to PZ Myers blog:

Excerpt:
http://www.pnas.o...abstract
"The evolution of behavior relies on changes at the level of the genome; yet the ability to attribute a behavioral change to a specific, naturally occurring genetic change is rare in vertebrates. In the white-throated sparrow (Zonotrichia albicollis), a chromosomal polymorphism (ZAL2/2m) is known to segregate with a behavioral phenotype. Individuals with the ZAL2m haplotype engage in more territorial aggression and less parental behavior than individuals without it. These behaviors are thought to be mediated by sensitivity to sex steroids, and the chromosomal rearrangement underlying the polymorphism has captured a prime candidate gene: estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1), which encodes estrogen receptor α (ERα)."

Comment #317 "Mere stupidity I will tolerate, but I really don't need to give a platform to homophobes. Kohl has been banned."
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Jan 26, 2015
The anonymous fool (aka Andrew Jones / anonymous-9001) now asks:

Are chromosomal rearrangements deliberate in your model? Are they induced because they have beneficial effects?

See his review of my model: Criticisms of the nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled evolutionary model. http://www.ncbi.n...24959329

My model: Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model. http://www.ncbi.n...24693353

See also: From Fertilization to Adult Sexual Behavior http://www.hawaii...ion.html Excerpt: "...this difference was even apparent in somatic tissues (Page, Disteche, Simpson, De La Chapelle, Andersson, Alitalo, Brown, Green, and Akots, 1990). ZFX and ZFY are described as "DNA-binding proteins" and via their binding of sexually dimorphic proteins, chromatin structure and transcription could be modulated in sexually dimorphic ways..."
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Jan 26, 2015
Are chromosomal rearrangements deliberate in your model? Are they induced because they have beneficial effects?


In the context of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled cell type differentiation via amino acid substitutions, the rearrangements differentiate the cell types of all cells in all individuals of all species -- not just those that reproduce sexually. Obviously, there is a need to link reproduction in species from microbes to man beginning with sexual reproduction (e.g., in yeasts).

I repeat:

Excerpt: "...this difference was even apparent in somatic tissues (Page, Disteche, Simpson, De La Chapelle, Andersson, Alitalo, Brown, Green, and Akots, 1990). ZFX and ZFY are described as "DNA-binding proteins" and via their binding of sexually dimorphic proteins, chromatin structure and transcription could be modulated in sexually dimorphic ways..."

Only a science idiot would try to link sex differences in somatic tissues and germ cells via mutagenesis.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Jan 26, 2015
He proved his ignorance
no, he simply didn't allow YOU to spread your bigotry... there is a difference, just like when i use your own words against you in an argument... i am not saying you are an idiot, YOU ARE
there is no reason to allow YOU to spread bigotry and prejudice on a website for ANY reason... even though PO allows it, he doesn't because he is intelligent and you are an idiot failure (self admitted)
PZ Myers accused me of being a homophobe
not because of your model, you moron, and you know it!
but because of your stupid CHOICES of bigotry shown in your posts here: http://freethough...s-place/
he even clarified it
Mere stupidity I will tolerate, but I really don't need to give a platform to homophobes. Kohl has been banned
comment 317 for those willing to read it all

IOW - YOU hung YOURSELF out as a prejudiced moron
now live with it, bigot boy
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Jan 26, 2015
Comment 299 to PZ Myers blog
and again, i will clarify for readers: you were not banned for posting a study
you were banned for being a bigoted prejudiced *sshole trying to spread your blatantly prejudiced lies... NOT for being stupid (he tolerated you for that)

you CHOSE to assume the ban was for your model
WHY?
because you are an illiterate MORON who lives to MISINTERPRET anything that goes against you, especially scientifically

i will post that again for readers who can and will follow the EVIDENCE

because of your stupid CHOICES of bigotry shown in your posts here: http://freethough...s-place/
he even clarified it
Mere stupidity I will tolerate, but I really don't need to give a platform to homophobes. Kohl has been banned
this comment is #317 for those willing to read it all
anonymous_9001
5 / 5 (5) Jan 26, 2015
I'll take that as a yes. So you're saying that rearrangements are deliberate actions made by cells.

However, like substitutions (mutations), rearrangements can be positive and negative.

http://www.tandfo...QfC7xXYM
http://www.biomed...11/S1/S1

Here's an extensive list of diseases associated with rearrangements:

http://dbcrid.biolead.org/

Remember Kohl, rearrangements are due todouble strand breaks, typically caused by radiation or mutagens.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Jan 26, 2015
Only a science idiot would try to
let me finish that for you for accuracy
Only a science idiot would try to...

-Interpret SCIENCE in the light or direction given by the Bible
or
-try in INTERPRET a study to say something it does not like you regularly do, as evidenced by your continual failures and the author feedback)
or
-try to OBFUSCATE science with word salads (this shows you really DON'T know WTF you are talking about)
or
-continue to promote a model that CAUSES MUTATIONS while vilifying mutations everywhere else

does that about cover it?

again, i provide Myers as an example of LOGIC and INTELLIGENCE as well as CLARITY and CONCISE argument against jk and his bigoted stupidity regularly posted here on PO
http://freethough...s-place/

just because you are TOLERATED (by PO and ScienceMag) doesn't mean you are CORRECT

simply tolerated
thats ALL
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jan 26, 2015
What the heck does the nutricous dependable aromamones have to do with the starting numbers of the universe?


Thanks for asking in your typically ignorant assumed dialect.

From the first appearance of recognizable differences in hydrogen atom energies, they prevent replication from leading to a mass that rapidly exceeds the entirety of the mass of the universe.

Science idiots, like you, typically attribute the mass to a Big Bang and they attribute control of the mass by cosmic rays that cause beneficial mutations that lead to evolution. See https://www.youtu...fliNAI3U for comparison to my model: http://youtu.be/DbH_Rj9U524

Note also that theoretical physicist Matti Pitkänen took everything I have detailed about light-induced RNA-mediated cell type differentiation and placed it into the context of the simultaneous emergence of chickens and eggs. http://matpitka.blogspot.com/ "Was ribosome the first self-replicator?"
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Jan 26, 2015
Here's the link from my model to Biocontainment of genetically modified organisms by synthetic protein design http://www.nature...121.html
"This article presents a detailed factual representation of the difference between a mutation and an amino acid substitution. They substitute synthetic amino acids to stabilize protein folding, which will probably prevent the modified organism from accumulating mutations.
Their work can be viewed in an atoms to ecosystems perspective. There is a clear difference between what energy-dependent flipping of base pairs that lead to amino acid substitutions and mutations can do.
If energy-dependent "mutations" were not controlled, replication of molecules would quickly lead to biomass that exceeds the calculated mass of the universe. How can anyone who is not biologically uninformed fail to realize this? Amino acid substitutions appear to help biophysically constrain the mass of the universe.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Jan 26, 2015
If energy-dependent "mutations" were not controlled, replication of molecules would quickly lead to biomass that exceeds the calculated mass of the universe.
I can't wait to see your attempt to legitimize THIS croc of pseudoscience!

where is the proof of this statement?
where is the studies?
the hypothesis and experiments?
Where is ANY evidence that supports this BS?
are you talking about TOTAL mass or simply visible mass?
(it would have to be visible mass if we are talking about visible matter, but i digress...)
Are you including the mass of Dark Matter or any other factors other than some BOE BS napkin calculations based upon your religion?
Serious scientists look at the experimental evidence
then why do you ignore Lenski and Extavour?
and their work which proves you WRONG and an idiot?
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jan 26, 2015
Only a science idiot would try to... -Interpret SCIENCE in the light or direction given by the Bible


Serious scientists look at the experimental evidence, like Dobzhansky did when he noted that "...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." http://www.jstor..../4444260

Long before groups like Church's and long before Christ's works linked amino acid substitutions via heterochronic parabiosis to "The Pharmacology of Regenerative Medicine" via the exchange of blood, the history of biophysically constrained biomass was recorded so that even those with no knowledge of science could understand it.

The fact that biologically uninformed science idiots who participate here still cannot understand that biomass must be constrained exemplifies the pervasive amount of ignorance in a world where the opinions of idiots are accepted.
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jan 26, 2015
I can't wait to see your attempt to legitimize THIS croc of pseudoscience!


There is no reason to wait: Read "What is Life? How Chemistry Becomes Biology"
Instead, since you obviously have a short attention span due to the brain damage from the bomb blast, read this book review: http://www.pagepr...iew/4637

"Transformations proceed, within the restrictions of the laws of thermodynamics, to more stable states. But the latter is perhaps unique to life. In some circumstances there can be a dynamic kinetic stability, or DKS, where the persistence of the system as a whole is maintained through constant change."

Nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled thermodynamic cycles of protein biosynthesis and degradation enable constant change that links amino acid substitutions to DKS via cell type differentiation in species from microbes to man. There's a model for that: http://www.ncbi.n...24693353

JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jan 26, 2015
where is the proof of this statement?
where is the studies?
the hypothesis and experiments?


I have repeatedly told you and others that works by Church and by Christ et al, are exemplified in the findings from "Clinically Actionable Genotypes Among 10,000 Patients With Preemptive Pharmacogenomic Testing" http://www.medsca...24253661

The article links the biophysically constrained chemistry of protein folding from metabolic networks to genetic networks and differentiates between what mutations cause and the nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled stability of organized genomes in species from microbes to man.

So you're saying that rearrangements are deliberate actions made by cells.


No, you science idiot! I'm saying they are nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled.

I'll take that as a yes.


You will meaningfully interpret anything I say to make it appear that I support your ridiculous theories.
Uncle Ira
4.2 / 5 (10) Jan 26, 2015
What the heck does the nutricous dependable aromamones have to do with the starting numbers of the universe?


Thanks for asking in your typically ignorant assumed dialect.

From the first appearance of recognizable differences in hydrogen atom energies,


So the different hydrogen atoms can smell each others energies? How does that work, they have hydrogen noses to do the sniffing with?

Science idiots, like you, typically attribute the mass to a Big Bang and they attribute control of the mass by cosmic rays that cause beneficial mutations that lead to evolution.


Well that is the difference you from me. Science idiots like me try to get the science experts to help me understand how the attributing gets done. Science idiots like you try to pretend you are not the science idiot by saying a lot of gobbledygook.

Ain't nothing shameful about being ignorant. The shameful thing is to be afraid to admit it. And not try to get to be unignorant..
anonymous_9001
5 / 5 (7) Jan 26, 2015
No, you science idiot! I'm saying they are nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled.


So what nutrients cause beneficial rearrangements and what nutrients cause detrimental rearrangements? In this paper, acetalaldehyde is implicated in both:

http://www.geneti...full.pdf

Multiple pathways are responsible for DNA DSB repair, including nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ), homologous recombination (HR), and break-induced replication (BIR). These pathways are important for maintaining chromosomal integrity. Conversely, their faulty application has the potential to cause chromosomal rearrangements


Dysfunction of DNA repair is how rearrangements persist, so that means dysfunction of DNA repair can be beneficial since some rearrangements are beneficial. That means they're beneficial mutations! QED! Slam dunk! Touchdown! Whatever you want to call it!
Maggnus
5 / 5 (6) Jan 26, 2015
No, you science idiot! I'm saying they are nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled.


So what nutrients cause beneficial rearrangements and what nutrients cause detrimental rearrangements? In this paper, acetalaldehyde is implicated in both:

Multiple pathways are responsible for DNA DSB repair, including nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ), homologous recombination (HR), and break-induced replication (BIR). These pathways are important for maintaining chromosomal integrity. Conversely, their faulty application has the potential to cause chromosomal rearrangements


Dysfunction of DNA repair is how rearrangements persist, so that means dysfunction of DNA repair can be beneficial since some rearrangements are beneficial. That means they're beneficial mutations! QED! Slam dunk! Touchdown! Whatever you want to call it!


Slam dunk indeed. Proven by his own words. Betcha he backtracks so fast he leaves marks.
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jan 26, 2015
Whatever you want to call it!


Science idiocy is what all serious scientists call it. You linked to a 1993 paper on yeasts, when nearly everyone but you knows that their reproduction is nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled. "Signaling Crosstalk: Integrating Nutrient Availability and Sex" http://www.ncbi.n...3932994/

"Life is physics and chemistry and communication" http://dx.doi.org...as.12570

See also: Synergetic effects of DNA demethylation and histone deacetylase inhibition in primary rat hepatocytes http://dx.doi.org...1-9659-8

It links yeasts to mammals via "Feedback loops link odor and pheromone signaling with reproduction" http://www.scienc...05009815

I linked microbes to man in my model of nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated cell type differentiation http://www.ncbi.n...24693353

You ask:
what nutrients cause beneficial rearrangements

Uncle Ira
3.9 / 5 (7) Jan 26, 2015
You ask:
what nutrients cause beneficial rearrangements



That is not what I asked and you know it that. I ask you how hydrogen atoms can smell the energies of more hydrogen atoms. You are the one who said that is how the dependable nutritious aromaphomones are connected to the beginning of the universe. Then you call me the idiot for not knowing. Do hydrogens have noses to smell with?

Either help me learn something about it so I can be as smart as you, or quit calling me the science idiot because you can't explain what you mean.
Uncle Ira
3.9 / 5 (7) Jan 26, 2015
@ Everybody. JVK-Skippy calls me the science idiot because I don't know about this stuff. I admit for everybody I am ignorant about this one because I don't understand where anybody is coming from with the anthropic universe theory.

I AM NOT THE SCIENTIST-SKIPPY like a lot of other peoples here aren't either. But it sounds to me almost like creation-religion-gobbledygook dressed up to sound scientifical. Anthropic I look up on the Google has do with living things and humans. But the universe did not start with living things in it as far as I can find out. So there was no biology going on in the start of the universe. Is that wrong? (Only smart Skippys please, no foolish-Skippys because I am already confused on this one already)

It just don't make sense to me that the universe is the way it is so we could be here, unless the universe can think ahead of time and planned it out and that sounds like creation-religious-gobbledygook to poor idiot Ira-Skippy
anonymous_9001
5 / 5 (6) Jan 26, 2015
You linked to a 1993 paper on yeasts


1. Read it again. It's from 2003. That in and of itself is telling of your reading comprehension skills.

2. That doesn't change anything. If the date (which you misread) is the only thing you can complain about in that paper, that makes me right.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (3) Jan 27, 2015
Serious scientists look at the experimental evidence
@jk
well, that rules YOU out as a serious scientist
There is no reason to wait
actually, there is. your book review doesn't justify or give any evidence supporting your conclusions
AND
your conclusions make ASSumptions that are fallacious, like unlimited food supply, limited (or NO) predation and unlimited space (IOW - you lie and are trying to obfuscate science again)

Then you demonstrably ignore relevant details about links (see ANON above)

I think your biggest problem is that you are illiterate...

that would explain why you hate definitions and nomenclature/lexicons, and why you misinterpret everything you see...

maybe you are also having problems with your text-to-speech programs?
or do you use a person to translate for you?

again, you seem to have serious problems with comprehension that make me think YOU were the one with the bomb-blast brain damage

wanna try again, troll boy?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.