Displays of ecological adaptation (2)
On 9/12/16 Philip Qua wrote
I have not verified that all of his papers are peer review, but I do believe that some of them are. It is going to take some time and reading of James Kohl papers before I am even willing to venture whether they have merit or not. But on a first glance basis, what I think James is positing here is the causal-effect that drives evolution is more an energy based availability than a random genetic mutation event.
Unfortunately James paper are very advanced and I am running in to scientific lexicon issue that is limiting my understanding. This just means I need to step up my game and expand my knowledge in the area of cellular-evolutionary biology, which has been on my bucklist. I think it is about time to get it out of the bucket.
My comment: My peer-reviewed papers are no more advanced than those published by other serious scientists who have learned how RNA-mediated cell type differentiation occurs. For comparison, see this representation from neo-Darwinian theorists (e.g., population geneticists).
…bacteria spread and evolved on a large antibiotic landscape (120 × 60 centimeters) that allowed visual observation of mutation and selection…
My comments: The ability of the bacteria to spread is nutrient energy-dependent. They placed that fact back into the context of their visual observation.
They ignored the fact that the nutrient energy-dependent pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction clearly links biophysically constrained RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions to the surviving cell types at the level of hydrogen-atom transfer in DNA base pairs in solution. That fact has been demonstrated in the works of serious scientists.
When claims about what was observed do not make sense in the context of nutrient energy-dependent links from angstroms to ecosystems via the physiology of reproduction, the claims typically are placed into the context of mutations and evolution. Virus-driven energy theft and entropy of organized genomes is not considered.
That’s the magic of neo-Darwinian theory. All that pseudoscientists need to do is keep touting their nonsense until everyone learns about hydrogen-bonding interactions, which have been observed in the context of femtosecond blasts of virucidal ultraviolet light.
Molecular docking computations revealed an unexpected, and general, specific hydrogen-bonding interactions with viral surface proteins, and virus and cell binding assay demonstrated a significant reduction in infection after incubating virus or cells with the antiviral polymers.
My comment: That fact is not going to be discussed by theorists who will continue to use their atheistic antagonism to defend their ridiculous theories rather than examine the facts known to serious scientists.
The observed constraint in the orientational order of water molecules is also detectable macroscopically: The decrease in surface tension measured at micromolar concentrations points to a qualitative change in the surface propensity of ions that can be explained in terms of the collective interaction between nanoscopic “ordered domains” of water around ions and the interface. The H-bond restructuring observed in the fs-ESHS measurements occurs in both H2O and D2O, but the comparative response of D2O is a factor of ~3 lower in relative fs-ESHS intensity than that of H2O, and occurs at an ~6× higher electrolyte concentration. This is consistent with H-bonds being stronger in D2O than in H2O as a result of nuclear quantum effects, which leads to smaller perturbations in heavy water than in light water. This large difference in the onset concentration is also observed in surface tension measurements, suggesting a further link between nanoscopic and macroscopic length scales.
Reported as: A single ion impacts a million water molecules
The interaction between water and ions is omnipresent in biological processes related to enzymes, ion channels and protein folding. Every new piece of knowledge gives greater insight into how life works.
My comment: If you skip what is known about the observed biophysical constraints in the orientational order of water molecules, you are stuck with a ridiculous theory that does not link the sun’s anti-entropic virucidal energy to biologically-based cause and effect. You learn nothing about the speed of light on contact with water and everything that can be measured by a spectrophotometer.
You learn nothing about how pH is linked to the spectrophotometric measures. You fail to learn about the weekend resurrection of the bacterial flagellum. It occurred in Pseudomonas fluorescens, which looks like this under ultraviolet light.