Iron: A biological element?

June 25, 2015, University of Wisconsin-Madison
By studying iron extracted from cores drilled in rocks similar to these in Karijini National Park, Western Australia, UW-Madison researchers determined that half of the iron atoms had originated in shallow oceans after being processed by microbes 2.5 billion years ago. Credit: Clark Johnson

Think of an object made of iron: An I-beam, a car frame, a nail. Now imagine that half of the iron in that object owes its existence to bacteria living two and a half billion years ago.

That's the upshot of a study published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). The findings have meaning for fields as diverse as mining and the search for life in space.

Clark Johnson, a professor of geoscience at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and former postdoctoral researcher Weiqiang Li examined samples from the banded iron formation in Western Australia. Banded iron is the iron-rich rock found in ore deposits worldwide, from the proposed iron mine in Northern Wisconsin to the enormous mines of Western Australia.

These ancient deposits, up to 150 meters deep, were begging for explanation, says Johnson.

Scientists thought the iron had entered the ocean from hot, mineral-rich water released at mid-ocean vents that then precipitated to the ocean floor. Now Johnson and Li, who is currently at Nanjing University in China, show that half of the iron in banded iron was metabolized by ancient bacteria living along the continental shelves.

The banding was thought to represent some sort of seasonal changes. The UW-Madison researchers found long-term swings in the composition, but not variations on shorter periods like decades or centuries.

The study began with precise measurements of isotopes of iron and neodymium using one of the world's fastest lasers, housed in the UW-Madison geoscience department. (Isotopes, forms of an atom that differ only by weight, are often used to "fingerprint" the source of various samples.)

Banded iron formations are the primary source of iron ore worldwide. These rocks, at Soudan Underground Mine State Park, Minnesota, shows banding caused by layers of different minerals in a sample 2.7 billion years old. The study by Johnson and Li at UW-Madison showed that half of the iron in such rocks was metabolized by microbes before being deposited in rocks. Credit: Clark Johnson

Bursts of light less than one-trillionth of a second long vaporized thin sections of the sample without heating the sample itself. "It's like taking an ice cream scoop and quickly pulling out material before it gets heated," Johnson explains.

"Heating with traditional lasers gave spurious results."

It took three years to perfect the working of the laser and associated mass spectrometry instruments, Li says.

Previous probes of the source of banded iron had focused on iron isotopes. "There has been debate about what the iron isotopes were telling us about the source," Li says. "Adding neodymium changed that picture and gave us an independent measure of the amount coming from shallow continental waters that carried an isotopic signature of life."

The idea that an organism could metabolize iron may seem strange today, but Earth was very different 2.5 billion years ago. With little oxygen in the atmosphere, many organisms derived energy by metabolizing iron instead of oxygen.

Biologists say this process "is really deep in the tree of life, but we've had little evidence from the rock record until now," Johnson says. "These ancient microbes were respiring iron just like we respire oxygen. It's a hard thing to wrap your head around, I admit."

The current study is important in several ways, Johnson says. "If you are an exploration geologist, you want to know the source of the minerals so you know where to explore."

The research also clarifies the evolution of our planet—and of life itself—during the "iron-rich" era 2.5 billion years ago. "What vestiges of the iron-rich world remain in our metabolism?" Johnson asks. "It's no accident that iron is an important part of life, that early biological molecules may have been -based."

NASA has made the search for life in space a major focus and sponsors the UW-Madison Astrobiology Institute, which Johnson directs. Recognizing unfamiliar forms of is a priority for the space agency.

The study reinforces the importance of microbes in geology. "This represents a huge change," Johnson says. "In my introductory geochemistry textbook from 1980, there is no mention of biology, and so every diagram showing what minerals are stable at what conditions on the surface of the Earth is absolutely wrong."

Research results like these affect how classes are taught, Johnson says. "If I only taught the same thing, I would be teaching things that are absolutely wrong. If you ever wonder why we combine teaching and research at this university, geomicrobiology gives you the answer. It has completely turned geoscience on its ear."

Explore further: Banded ironstone formation theory challenges current thinking

More information: Biologically recycled continental iron is a major component in banded iron formations, www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1505515112

Related Stories

Physicists reach new milestone measuring half-life of iron-60

February 2, 2015

(Phys.org)—A team of physicists affiliated with institutions in Australia, Switzerland and Austria has made the most accurate measurement to date of the half life of iron-60. In their paper published in the journal Physical ...

Iron-oxidizing bacteria found along Mid-Atlantic Ridge

March 11, 2015

Bacteria that live on iron were found for the first time at three well-known vent sites along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, one of the longest undersea mountain ranges in the world. Scientists report that these bacteria likely ...

Recommended for you

Nanoscale Lamb wave-driven motors in nonliquid environments

March 19, 2019

Light driven movement is challenging in nonliquid environments as micro-sized objects can experience strong dry adhesion to contact surfaces and resist movement. In a recent study, Jinsheng Lu and co-workers at the College ...

OSIRIS-REx reveals asteroid Bennu has big surprises

March 19, 2019

A NASA spacecraft that will return a sample of a near-Earth asteroid named Bennu to Earth in 2023 made the first-ever close-up observations of particle plumes erupting from an asteroid's surface. Bennu also revealed itself ...

The powerful meteor that no one saw (except satellites)

March 19, 2019

At precisely 11:48 am on December 18, 2018, a large space rock heading straight for Earth at a speed of 19 miles per second exploded into a vast ball of fire as it entered the atmosphere, 15.9 miles above the Bering Sea.

Levitating objects with light

March 19, 2019

Researchers at Caltech have designed a way to levitate and propel objects using only light, by creating specific nanoscale patterning on the objects' surfaces.

56 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

JVK
1 / 5 (4) Jun 25, 2015
Does anyone who is not a evolutionary theorist not know of the link from iron to biologically-based cause and effect in species from microbes to man?

Oxidation of cellular amino acid pools leads to cytotoxic mistranslation of the genetic code
http://elifescien...3/e02501]http://elifescien...3/e02501[/url]

Excerpt: Reactive oxygen species (ROS) generated under oxidative stress via the Fenton reaction are capable of catalyzing the conversion of Phe to m-Tyr, which could potentially threaten the fidelity of protein synthesis in the absence of editing (Maskos et al., 1992; Stadtman and Levine, 2003). http://elifescien...3/e02501]http://elifescien...3/e02501[/url]

Is anyone too biologically uninformed to realize that the conserved molecular mechanisms of biophysically constrained protein folding link our gut microbes to survival of our species and to the survival of other species via RNA-mediated metabolic networks and genetic networks?
thingumbobesquire
1 / 5 (1) Jun 26, 2015
This is further proof of Vladimir Vernadsky's principle of biogenic migration of chemical elements in the biosphere.
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Jun 26, 2015
Re: biogenic migration of chemical elements

How else could the de novo creation of amino acids be linked from UV light to RNA-mediated cell type differentiation via amino acid substitutions in all cell types of all individuals of all genera?
JVK
1 / 5 (4) Jun 26, 2015
https://en.wikipe...ernadsky

"He is most noted for his 1926 book The Biosphere in which he inadvertently worked to popularize Eduard Suess' 1885 term biosphere, by hypothesizing that life is the geological force that shapes the earth."



Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
5 / 5 (6) Jun 27, 2015
It would be nice if the work can test that GOE BIFs were extensively biotically processed at the time the atmosphere was oxygenated. The whole area is difficult, so controversial. Especially the time constant fo the bandings would help. It will be an interesting read!

@JVK: Obviously iron solute oceans had to exist before the Great Oxygenation Event, which is why oxygen wasn't a problem. Every biologist, with the exception of some fringe ones, knows that.

Moreover, there are bacteria living at anoxic depths in nutrient poor mountain lakes that process iron photolitothropically still, "respiring oxygen" as the article says.

Amino acid production is exothermic, so there is no need for special environments to see them abiotically, such as UV light. E.g. they are produced inside asteroids, away from light.
mreda14
not rated yet Jun 27, 2015
I think a statement such as:
The idea that an organism could metabolize iron may seem strange today.
Why strange, Iron metabolism by bacteria is a fact of life and there is a branch of material corrosion which is called bio-corrosion, corrosion of iron induced by bacteria.
Browning of a juice is due to the oxidation of colorless ferrous ions to insoluble brown ferric ions by bacteria.
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jun 27, 2015
Amino acid production is exothermic, so there is no need for special environments to see them abiotically, such as UV light. E.g. they are produced inside asteroids, away from light.


On this planet they are created by the anti-entropic epigenetic effect of our sun's biological energy. Only "Big Bang" cosmologists and evolutionary theorists seem to think that the de novo creation of amino acids in deep space is relevant to the nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions that differentiate all cell types of all individuals of all genera.

bacteria living at anoxic depths
have not changed in ~half the age of the earth, which suggests that researchers don't know anything about cell type differentiation and the four days it took to "re-evolve" the bacterial flagellum in another species.

anonymous_9001
5 / 5 (6) Jun 27, 2015
On this planet they are created by the anti-entropic epigenetic effect of our sun's biological energy.


Are you referring to prebiotic amino acid synthesis here? If so, "epigenetic" doesn't make sense in that context. In a prebiotic environment, there are no genetics and thus no epigenetics. You wouldn't refer to the Miller/Urey experiment as an epigenetic synthesis.

Yeah, UV light does catalyze amino acid synthesis from precursors we've determined were present on the early Earth. That's in addition to deposition from meteorites.
RealScience
5 / 5 (5) Jun 27, 2015
RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions that differentiate all cell types of all individuals of all genera


@JVK, you use 'all' far too much. For example, there are over 500 genera identified already that don't even have cells.

anonymous_9001
5 / 5 (3) Jun 28, 2015
500 genera identified already that don't even have cells


What are you referring to here? All organisms have cells.
RealScience
5 / 5 (5) Jun 28, 2015
@Anon - Organisms? JVK said nothing about organisms (or life forms), he said "all genera".

(Whether viruses are 'organisms' or 'alive' depends on definitions. While some cell-focused biologists argue that viruses are not alive because they don't have cells, that argument increasingly appears 'cell-ist' as the complexity of viruses becomes known (e.g., the largest viruses have several times more genes than the smallest bacteria, some viruses have their own gene replication and expression regulation, some viruses even have their own parasites...)

But regardless of that side discussion, JVK said 'all genera', and viruses are most certainly classified in genera, with over 500 genera of viruses already identified (the definitive reference is Virus Taxonomy: Classification and Nomenclature of Viruses from the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses.)

Wikipedia has a list of the genera of viruses from the report:
https://en.wikipe..._viruses
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jun 28, 2015
JVK said 'all genera', and viruses are most certainly classified in genera...


The differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions.

Are you referring to prebiotic amino acid synthesis here?


NO

If so, "epigenetic" doesn't make sense in that context.
It makes no sense for you to attempt to put words in my mouth rather than wait for me to answer your ridiculous question.

Now, tell us all about the experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect that links the deep space origin of amino acids to cell type differentiation in all cells of all individuals of all species via their biophysically constrained chemistry of nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated protein folding on this planet.
RealScience
5 / 5 (4) Jun 28, 2015
JVK said 'all genera', and viruses are most certainly classified in genera...
The differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions.


You need to be more careful - this is the second time I've had to point out to you that viruses don't have cells (the first was in your own blog, where you commented: "They linked the immune system response to cell type differentiation in the viruses and cell type difference in the host across the course of the infection." (see: http://phys.org/n...n.html))

Now what evidence do have to support your claim that "the differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions"?

(And I don't mean evidence that it happens in SOME cell types in SOME individuals in SOME genera...)
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jun 29, 2015
Amino acid substitutions differentiate viruses and the cell types of all cells of all individuals of all genera -- you moron. Stop interpreting my comments in the light of your pseudoscientific nonsense, or tell us how you think that thermodynamic cycles of protein biosynthesis and degradation are biophysically constrained.
RealScience
5 / 5 (4) Jun 29, 2015
Amino acid substitutions differentiate viruses and the cell types of all cells of all individuals of all genera -- you moron. Stop interpreting my comments in the light of your pseudoscientific nonsense...


So asking you what evidence you have to support your claim is "interpreting your comments" in the light of pseudoscientific nonsense? Or questioning the difference between SOME and ALL is "interpreting your comments" in the light of pseudoscientific nonsense?

You used 'ALL' in your claim. So what evidence do have to support your claim that "the differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions"?
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jun 29, 2015
What experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect do pseudoscientists claim supports anything besides RNA-mediated cell type differentiation, which occurs via fixation of amino acid substitutions in the context of nutrient-dependent protein biosynthesis and degradation?

this is the second time I've had to point out to you that viruses don't have cells


What kind of biologically uninformed science idiot thinks he can point out something important to me about the biophysically constrained chemistry of RNA-mediated protein folding?
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (3) Jun 30, 2015
What experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect do pseudoscientists claim supports anything besides RNA-mediated cell type differentiation, which occurs via fixation of amino acid substitutions in the context of nutrient-dependent protein biosynthesis and degradation?
@jk
why don't you first point out this evidence supporting your claims like this one
In the past two years I've learned enough about physics to link the speed of light on contact with water to the de novo creation of amino acids...
found here: http://phys.org/n...ion.html

this is the type of "biologically uninformed science idiot" comment that gets people like you in trouble... if you want attention, go to 4chan or reddit or stick to your own blogs... this is a science site and you've not been able to provide any justification for most of your "interpretations" of science

Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (3) Jun 30, 2015
as for this little gem of stupidity


What kind of biologically uninformed science idiot thinks he can point out something important to me about the biophysically constrained chemistry of RNA-mediated protein folding?
so far you have a 100% FAIL rate interpreting science, be it from other places, like your attempts to "interpret" Dr's Whittaker and Extavour, Lenski or Ellis (or even Darwin) to even your own model, where you continue to claim
Mutations perturb protein folding
like here:
http://medicalxpr...mic.html

but your own model utilizes MUTATIONS to work...

epic fail for jk .... and you claim to be Mensa? really?

maybe you can get noumenon to join your religion... he loves talking in circles and refusing to produce evidence! that is how philo's work... just like religions!

JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jun 30, 2015
Susan Lindquist: Protein Folding and Disease
http://www.ibiolo...ase.html

Has anyone else besides "raised by wolves" SSgt Stumpy (aka Captain Stumpy) not yet realized that RNA-mediated protein folding is nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled in species from yeasts to humans?

Does anyone else think that perturbed protein folding is beneficial? Does anyone who is not a biologically uninformed science idiot think that mutations, which perturb protein folding, are beneficial?

See also: Increased sugar uptake promotes oncogenesis via EPAC/RAP1 and O-GlcNAc pathways http://www.ncbi.n...3871217/

Reported as: The Sugar-Cancer Connection in 3D http://stke.scien...310/ec29
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (3) Jun 30, 2015
Does anyone else think that perturbed protein folding is beneficial?
@jk
YEP!
YOU DO! and i can prove it... start with your quote here
Mutations perturb protein folding
now lets take a look at your own model
...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
therefore, we can plainly see that you yourself promote the idea that "perturbed protein folding is beneficial"!!
Does anyone who is not a biologically uninformed science idiot think that mutations, which perturb protein folding, are beneficial?
as you can see already... you are simply calling yourself a complete idiot... and definitely a "biologically uninformed science idiot"

you have no ability to comprehend biology... maybe you can go back to diagnostics?
(sarc)
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jun 30, 2015
"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)


The base pair changes are nutrient-dependent in my model of biologically-based cause and effect. They link the anti-entropic epigenetic effects of microRNAs to RNA-directed DNA methylation and the RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions that stabilize the organized genomes of all genera via their physiology of reproduction, which enables fixation of the RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions in ecologically adapted populations.

Perturbed protein folding is linked to pathology when nutrient stress and/or social stress lead to mutations during thermodynamic cycles of protein biosynthesis and degradation, which link mutations to diseases and disorders without the pseudoscientific nonsense about mutations and evolution.
RealScience
5 / 5 (3) Jun 30, 2015
JVK, attempting to change the subject makes it look like you have no answer, and your attempts at insults show your transference acting up again. You still haven't answered the question, so I'll ask it a third time:

What evidence do you have to support your claim that "the differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions"?

JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jun 30, 2015
Force for ancient and recent life: viral and stem-loop RNA consortia promote life
http://dx.doi.org...as.12565

See also: http://www.huffin...898.html

Suzan Mazur: It's disappointing if we've got decades of compelling evidence about viruses and evolution, why it's not being responsibly considered by the scientific establishment, particularly in America.

Luis Villarreal: These shifts usually take generations. How can evolutionary science not be talking about viruses when genomes are so heavily colonized by these entities? It's because scientists are human beings, and it's an inherent tendency of human cognition to defend what beliefs it has come to accept whether acquired by learning neo-Darwinian thinking or acquired by other social or cultural practices.

Also see anything published during the past decade by a member of the RNA Society.
RealScience
5 / 5 (3) Jun 30, 2015
The Mazur/Villarreal article is a good one, and I agree with Villarreal's broad view much more than Nei's narrow one.

But did you miss this?:
"([E]ndogenous) retroviruses have contributed to shape our genome, are constitutive components of it and are currently playing crucial roles in fundamental processes such as embryogenesis, tumorigenesis and, in the long run, evolution."

When retroviruses insert their DNA into the genome of a host (such as us), it changes the host's DNA sequence and thus fits the most common definition a mutation. So you have once again cited an article that goes against your claim that mutations don't contribute to evolution...

And you are still trying to change the subject.
What evidence do you have to support your claim that "the differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions"?

JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jun 30, 2015
...fits the most common definition a mutation.


The most common definition of a mutation is used by biologically uninformed science idiots --and morons like you-- who do not understand how RNA-mediated cell type differentiation occurs in the context of the biophysically constrained chemistry of nutrient-dependent protein folding.

Villarreal deserves credit for the link from viruses to entropic elasticity, but he does not appear to understand how the anti-entropic epigenetic effects of nutrient-dependent microRNAs link ecological variation to ecological adaptation in the context of the physiology of reproduction.

Like others who have specialized, he still seems to think in terms of "evolution." Therefore, like others who mention "evolution" he leads others to think in terms of mutations that perturb protein folding as if virus-induced perturbed protein folding could be beneficial.
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jun 30, 2015
What evidence do you have to support your claim that "the differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions"?


I've repeatedly told you that the evidence is detailed in my blog posts. It should be obvious that I am not going to try and detail it here for biologically uninformed science idiots who refuse to inform themselves.

http://rna-mediat...ge-rank/

Excerpt: It is disingenuous for anyone to place protein folding into the context of "music" after the excellent representations of Denis Noble did so in a series of presentations that established the changes required to link physiology to cell type differentiation.
RealScience
5 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2015
The most common definition of a mutation is used by biologically uninformed science idiots ...

Ah yes, the nerve of all those scientists in the fields of biology and genetics using a term in a way that they understand and agree to. They should be using the term as YOU define it... oh, wait, you refuse to define what you mean by 'mutation'...

And once again, as soon as one of the articles you cite for support is shown to disagree with your claims, you start to distance yourself from the authors.
RealScience
5 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2015
What evidence do you have to support your claim that "the differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions"?

I've repeatedly told you that the evidence is detailed in my blog posts. It should be obvious that I am not going to try and detail it here...


So you claim that your blog has DETAILED EVIDENCE that "the differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions"?

The blog excerpt that you just presented is not evidence for your claim
The last time I looked at your blog it had no such evidence, either.
Based on how much you post it is hard to believe that you would not post evidence if you had it.

What is obvious is that you made the claim here, and have so far failed to provide any supporting evidence here. So if you have such evidence, present it here.
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2015
...the nerve of all those scientists in the fields of biology and genetics using a term in a way that they understand and agree to.


Agreed. It is a display of their ignorance.
Excerpt: "Patterns of amino acid conservation have served as a tool for understanding protein evolution1." http://dx.doi.org...ure14497

The fact that RNA-directed DNA methylation and RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions differentiate the cell types of all individuals of all living genera via their physiology of reproduction is understood by serious scientists.

Serious scientists also understand the role of amino acid substitutions in viruses. For example, it's the reason you need a new flu vaccine each year.

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

JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2015
The last time I looked at your blog it had no such evidence, either.


Search Results for 'viruses' http://rna-mediat...=viruses

Greg Bear linked Luis Villarreal's works to the pheromone-controlled de novo creation of a new human subspecies in his novels "Darwin's Radio" (1999) and "Darwin's Children" (2003).

See also: Search Results for 'the darwin code' http://rna-mediat...win+code

The fact that his evidence -- presented as science fiction -- has been available for more than 15 years leads me to claim that evolutionary theorists have examined none of the experimental evidence of biologically-based cell type differentiation during the past two decades since publication of my book in 1995.

Perhaps only authors, like Bear, are also fact checkers. It seems that the evolution industry and big bang cosmology industry would rather look the other way and tout their ridiculous theories.

Which ridiculous theory are you touting?
anonymous_9001
5 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2015
Serious scientists also understand the role of amino acid substitutions in viruses. For example, it's the reason you need a new flu vaccine each year.


Yes, and the origin of those substitutions are base substitutions that take place during replication of the viruses genetic material.

Biophysics of adaptive mutation in influenza:

http://www.ncbi.n...24875650
JVK
1 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2015
...base substitutions that take place during replication...


Replication is biophysically constrained by the chemistry of nutrient-dependent protein folding.

What kind of biologically uninformed science idiot thinks he can tell me that mutations, which perturb protein folding, can be linked from ecological variation to ecological adaptations in viruses or in any cell type of any individual of any species?

See his review of my published work to find out what Andrew Jones (aka anonymous_9001) thinks he can tell you about mutations compared to the amino acid substitutions that differentiate viruses and the cell types of all genera in the context of viral replication and the physiology of reproduction.

Criticisms of the nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled evolutionary model
http://www.ncbi.n...4049134/

He won't tell you how the base substitutions "take place" but may claim they are not linked to RNA-mediated cell type differentiation.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Jul 01, 2015
http://rna-mediat...ge-rank/
REPORTED for PHISHING/SPAMMING and PSEUDOSCIENCE
What kind of biologically uninformed science idiot thinks he can tell me that mutations, which perturb protein folding...
you continue to make this claim... the best, fastest and easiest way to prove yourself correct is to provide evidence... problem is, there is already far too much VALIDATED evidence against you, like:
these mutations which proved to be beneficial
http://myxo.css.m...dex.html

this entire list: http://www.oeb.ha...oeb.html

this site run by a PhD: http://beacon-center.org/

shall i link more?

as for this
He won't tell you how the base substitutions "take place"
that's ok
you don't listen to actual science or biology/medicine anyway... it doesn't kibe with your religion

stop pushing your CREATIONIST/7th day advent dogma
RealScience
5 / 5 (2) Jul 01, 2015
...the nerve of all those scientists in the fields of biology and genetics using a term in a way that they understand and agree to.

Agreed. It is a display of their ignorance.

That's a good one, JVK - for a moment I thought that you were serious!
RealScience
5 / 5 (2) Jul 01, 2015

Serious scientists also understand the role of amino acid substitutions in viruses. For example, it's the reason you need a new flu vaccine each year.

Exactly - the amino acid sequence of some virus changes (mutates) in a way that benefits that virus by protecting it from the antibodies that we acquired the previous year, and this allows that virus to spread.

This is the standard model of evolution through some mutations being beneficial and those mutations being selected for that you keep claiming that there is no evidence for.

JVK
1 / 5 (2) Jul 01, 2015
The standard model was invented by population geneticists and others who had no understanding of RNA-mediated cell type differentiation or Darwin's 'conditions of life.'

[W]hat Haldane, Fisher, Sewell Wright, Hardy, Weinberg et al. did was invent.... The anglophone tradition was taught. I was taught, and so were my contemporaries, and so were the younger scientists. Evolution was defined as "changes in gene frequencies in natural populations." The accumulation of genetic mutations was touted to be enough to change one species to another.... No, it wasn't dishonesty. I think it was wish fulfillment and social momentum. Assumptions, made but not verified, were taught as fact. http://www.huffin...211.html
RealScience
5 / 5 (2) Jul 02, 2015
@JVK - the Denis Noble interview that you link is very good, but it does not support your position that mutations are never selected for. From the link you cite:

... the mechanism of random change followed by selection ... becomes one mechanism amongst many others.


In other words, random mutations plus selection have not been eliminated, but have been found to be just one mechanism out of many (including non-random mutations, heritable epigentic changes, and inheritance of regulatory RNAs).
JVK
1 / 5 (2) Jul 02, 2015
My model has been supported by all the experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect that has been published by serious scientists during the past two decades.

See: http://rna-mediat...earning/

Natural selection was removed from consideration by the author of "Mutation-Driven Evolution." See also: http://www.scient...plexity/

"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..."
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Jul 02, 2015
See: http://rna-mediat...earning/
PHISHING SITE
SPAMMING POST
PSEUDOSCIENCE

reported
My model has been supported by all the experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect that has been published by serious scientists during the past two decades.
then why is it directly refuted by the evidence from Lenski, Extavour, Whittaker and the rest?

in fact, you yourself state your model is not viable when you state "mutations perturb protein folding" because your model requires mutations, per your own words!

JVK
1 / 5 (2) Jul 02, 2015
why is it directly refuted by the evidence from Lenski, Extavour, Whittaker and the rest?


Obviously, no one has refuted my model and you are too simple-minded to realize that and quit making your ridiculously false claims.

The Utilization of Extracellular Proteins as Nutrients Is Suppressed by mTORC1
http://www.cell.c...900701-1

Summary

Abstract excerpt: Despite being surrounded by diverse nutrients, mammalian cells preferentially metabolize glucose and free amino acids. Recently, Ras-induced macropinocytosis of extracellular proteins was shown to reduce a transformed cell's dependence on extracellular glutamine. Here, we demonstrate that protein macropinocytosis can also serve as an essential amino acid source.

If you think that mutations somehow replace the need for a source of the amino acid substitutions that differentiate cell types, please support your ridiculous claims with evidence of how that could occur.
JVK
1 / 5 (2) Jul 02, 2015
Alternatively, search Google for "RNA mediated"

https://www.googl...mediated

When all serious scientists agree that cell type differentiation is RNA-mediated, why would pseudoscientists still claim that mutations can be linked to increasing organismal complexity in species from microbes to humans via the conserved molecular mechanisms of biophysically constrained protein folding chemistry.
RealScience
5 / 5 (2) Jul 02, 2015
My model has been supported by all the experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect that has been published by serious scientists during the past two decades.


You are too funny, JVK. Since you only consider people serious scientists if they agree with your model, it is impossible for someone to publish something that refutes your model and still be called a serious scientist by you.

But as the captain says, your model has been "directly refuted by the evidence from Lenski, Extavour, Whittaker and the rest".

In contrast, you have yet to present ANY evidence to support your claim that "the differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions".
JVK
1 / 5 (1) Jul 03, 2015
WEBINAR: Exosome Biogenesis and the Budding of Proteins and Viruses

Available on demand at http://engage.vev...seid=943
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (1) Jul 03, 2015
Obviously, no one has refuted my model and you are too simple-minded to realize that and quit making your ridiculously false claims.
@jk
sigh... really? how about this: http://www.socioa...ew/24367

there is enough evidence in that single critique to completely debunk (or refute) your model...
but, worse yet... the post above re: "Lenski, Extavour, Whittaker and the rest" specifically refers to your "claims" that mutations are never beneficial and perturb protein folding, etc...

if mutations are always pathological, then your claims are FALSE, and proven false by "Lenski, Extavour, Whittaker and the rest", therefore, you are specifically debunked and refuted - AGAIN

If you think that mutations somehow replace
it is not about what i think, it is about what i can prove.. and what YOU can prove...
and you've not proven that mutations are never beneficial

creationist dogma is NOT SCIENCE
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (1) Jul 03, 2015
Alternatively, search Google for "RNA mediated"
i do, whenever you link your BS site... funny thing is: it never comes up in google scholar
When all serious scientists agree that cell type differentiation is RNA-mediated...
i have a better question for you, kohl!

When all serious scientists and educated researchers in biology, medicine and related fields accept that "any changes to the nucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism, virus, or extrachromosomal genetic element" is a mutation, then why do you completely disagree and fight against the common use of a word which is defined in your own lexicon specifically for the ease of communication?

why the kohl-slaw-word-salad?

why do you use your Dunning-Kruger to imply everyone with an education is stupid, but somehow you and your failed college attempt (and complete lack of evidence) are the only ones correct?

why do you use creationist diatribe in science?
JVK
1 / 5 (2) Jul 03, 2015
if mutations are always pathological, then your claims are FALSE


Mutations are not beneficial.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (1) Jul 04, 2015
Mutations are not beneficial.
@jk
and again, this is proven false by Lenski, Dr's Extavour and Whittaker, and many others
see: http://myxo.css.m...dex.html

http://www.oeb.ha...oeb.html

http://beacon-center.org/

and many others

IOW - your comment is a lie and repeating it doesn't make it any more true by repetition (except of course to the religious or creationist/7th day adventist who simply appeal to your supposed authority which doesn't exist, as you are a lab tech for a perfume company, nothing more)
RealScience
5 / 5 (2) Jul 05, 2015
Mutations are not beneficial.


What scientists in biology and genetics define as 'mutations' are typically either neutral or harmful, but are occasionally beneficial.

Since you refuse to share what you mean by 'mutations', it is silly for you to complain about how others use the term. For example, if a radioactive atom decays and damages a DNA molecule and the DNA repair process changes the DNA sequence instead of restoring it, is that a 'mutation' as you use the term, or is it not a mutation as you use the term?

(And you have yet to present ANY evidence to support your claim that "the differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions".)
JVK
1 / 5 (2) Jul 05, 2015
You have yet to mention anything that can be readily found in a google search for "RNA mediated" https://www.googl...mediated

I provide links to evidence like this:

RNA-mediated pathogenic mechanisms in polyglutamine diseases and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis http://journal.fr...431/full

You ignore them, and ask for my definition of mutation.
RealScience
5 / 5 (2) Jul 05, 2015
Do you know the difference between ALL and SOME?
I specifically asked for evidence regarding your claim that ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions:

Now what evidence do have to support your claim that "the differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions"?

(And I don't mean evidence that it happens in SOME cell types in SOME individuals in SOME genera...)


You have not presented any evidence that "the differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions".

This is like your claim that mutations are NEVER selected for. When repeatedly asked for evidence, you finally had to admit that there COULD BE NO SUCH EVIDENCE.

Furthermore, many individual cells die before they differentiate, so your statement is clearly wrong.

As I said, you use 'all' far too much. LMAO!
JVK
1 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2015
You have not presented any evidence that "the differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions".


There is no need for me to do that. It's a fact. No definitions were used in establishing that fact. Everything known about the biophysically constrained nutrient-dependent chemistry of RNA-mediated protein folding was all that was required.

This is like your claim that mutations are NEVER selected for.


It's not a claim. It's a fact. Why do you think I linked to an article about ALS. The facts differentiate the theories of Stephen Hawking from those of the biologically informed who might otherwise have treated him with effective anti-viral therapies -- had his ridiculous theories not prevailed in physics for long enough to bolster the claims of biologically uninformed evolutionary theorists.

I heard he may consider assisted suicide, which is akin to dying of theory.
JVK
1 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2015
As I said, you use 'all' far too much. LMAO!


Stop your maniacal laughing for a moment. It is only an indicator of assinine lunacy.

See also: 'Bee soup' could help understand declines and test remedies
http://phys.org/n...ies.html

The first author is a co-author of Phylogenomics resolves the timing and pattern of insect evolution http://www.scienc...abstract

Abstract excerpt: Phylogenomic analyses of nucleotide and amino acid sequences, with site-specific nucleotide or domain-specific amino acid substitution models, produced statistically robust and congruent results resolving previously controversial phylogenetic relationships.

Provide results from experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect for comparison to those that resolved "...previously controversial phylogenetic relationships" via experimental evidence that RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions differentiate cell types.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2015
It is only an indicator of assinine lunacy
[sic]@jk
no... the best indicators of "assinine lunacy" [sic] are:
-when people blatantly ignore experimental data which prove them wrong (like you do)
-or when they claim experience they don't have, like your felonious claims of "40 years experience in diagnostic medicine"
-or perhaps thinking that creationist dogma (religion) is somehow scientific, despite the absolute proof that there is NO science in 7th day adventist/creationist religious proclamations (See: https://en.wikipe...Arkansas for further details)
Another good example of "assinine lunacy" [sic] is this comment
I heard he may consider assisted suicide, which is akin to dying of theory
or to watch people call actual scientists "biologically uninformed science idiots" because they refute your claims with evidence!

all in all, the best indicators of "assinine lunacy" [sic] are to follow your posts, jk!
RealScience
5 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2015
You have not presented any evidence that "the differentiation of viruses and ALL cell types of ALL individuals of ALL living genera occurs via amino acid substitutions".


There is no need for me to do that. It's a fact.


You claim that it is a fact, but fail to present any evidence to support your claim.
Furthermore since you insisted on using ALL in your claim, it only takes one counter example to prove your claim wrong presented a counter-example. ROTFLMAO!

As I said, you use 'all' far too much. LMAO!

Stop your maniacal laughing for a moment. It is only an indicator of assinine lunacy.


Exactly - yours!
(And your misspelling it assinine is probably your transference acting up again...)
JVK
1 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2015
it only takes one counter example to prove your claim wrong presented a counter-example.


Go ahead. MAKE MY DAY!

(And your misspelling it assinine is probably your transference acting up again...)


The spelling is appropriate for a target audience of asses.

See: http://medicalxpr...aks.html

Excerpt: "This study highlights the critical and oft forgotten role played by non-coding RNAs in the battle between viruses and their human hosts..."

Critical, of course, but who are they saying forgot about the role of non-coding RNAs?

Theorists have ignored the role. Serious scientists have not forgotten it. At SFN 2012, it became perfectly clear that the viral microRNA / nutrient-dependent microRNA balance links the biophysically constrained chemistry of protein folding to cell type differentiation in all cells of all individuals of all genera via their physiology of reproduction.
RealScience
5 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2015
it only takes one counter example to prove your claim wrong presented a counter-example.


Go ahead. MAKE MY DAY!


Consider a bacterium that splits repeatedly in a food-rich environment. With plentiful food, the resulting bacteria have no need to differentiate into hardier forms, and so most remain in their multiplying state. These individual bacteria do not have multiple types of cells, nor has the one cell of any individual differentiated into different cell types. And some individual bacteria go from such a state to DEAD too quickly to form hardy spores (predators, meteors, lightning, etc.).

So some individuals of some living genera never even differentiate into different cell types, and your statement is thus shown to be wrong by counter example.

As I said, you use ALL too much.

Do you want me to correct your statement for you?

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.