Business Verified eBay Store Seal Watch Video Watch Video

A key mutational event? More story-telling. Olfaction modulates vision.

Posted on December 3, 2012 by James Kohl.

In my model, the epigenetic effects of nutrient chemicals on intracellular signaling and stochastic gene expression cause Imprinting Evolution, which is controlled by the metabolism of the nutrient chemicals to species-specific pheromones. Pheromones epigenetically control reproduction in species from microbes to man.  In my model, Natural Selection is for nutrient chemicals that enable survival.  Sexual Selection in organisms hat sexually reproduce is for pheromones that signal nutrient chemical-dependent reproductive fitness.

I asked this question on the evolutionary psychology group

Which makes more sense: Imprinting evolution or an ancient genetic accident (e.g., a mutation)? If the mutation story makes more sense, why hasn’t anyone provided a model that details how mutations cause adaptive evolution?

The response I received from the group’s moderator is here. (I’ve tried to make sense of it by paraphrasing, rephrasing, and using excerpts but so far none of what he said makes sense to me.

Remember the question: Why hasn’t anyone provided a model that details how mutations cause adaptive evolution?

——————————-

‘Natural Selection’ and ‘Sexual Selection’ are the standard models that detail how mutations cause adaptive evolution. In these models, “…variations between individuals form a pool of potential breeders where only the fittest proliferate.”

Q. Where do the variations come from?

A. Primarily from the existing genome due to  mutations caused mainly by flaws in the replication process. 

Q. Where did the existing genome come from?

A.________________________

Q. How important are the flaws and mutations to adaptive evolution?

A.  The flaws are mostly neutral causing no variation.  Most of the rest are deleterious but some are advantageous.

Q. How do flaws that are neutral, deleterious, or advantageous cause adaptive evolution?
A.________________________
Double chromosomes, gene repeats known to determine the onset of some diseases, horizontal gene transfer, and retroviruses that insert themselves  in the genome and result in ‘junk DNA’ also are involved. “Thus there are numerous sources of mutation or genetic variation (I have listed some of the main ones) and known processes for the selection of the viable and also the advantageous phenotypes.”
Q: How do mutations or these known processes cause adaptive evolution?
A.________________________
“There is a model for that and we have been developing it for more than 150 years now…”
Comment: There is a model for what? He just told the same story about a theory of Natural Selection and Sexual Selection that’s been told for more than 150 years. I asked for a model of how mutations caused adaptive evolution. He said that Natural Selection and Sexual Selection are the standard models, but then simply regurgitated a ridiculous story about mutations that somehow  cause adaptive evolution. Does anyone else see a problem with evolutionary theory?
The problem I see is that it cannot be compared to any model. In my model Natural Selection is for nutrient chemicals that enable survival.  Sexual Selection in organisms that sexually reproduce is for pheromones that signal nutrient chemical-dependent reproductive fitness. There are no mutations required and the processes involved are not random. Organisms must first choose the right food and then choose to not reproduce and reproduce asexually or sexually with the best mates or their species doesn’t survive.
My response to the moderator is here:
JK: Thanks RKS: What’s been developed is a theory of evolution, not a model. No facts support the theory of mutational cause, which started being developed into a story-line before anything was known about molecular biology. We now know for example, that there is no “Junk DNA.” Some of what you say above is an attempt to make the molecular biology fit the theory. For example, thanks for bringing the viruses into the picture as did Luis Villarreal who noted that “…odor receptors, in particular, provide a clear evolutionary trail that can be followed from microbes to humans.” But that’s my model, remember?

And, here we are, 150 years post theory construction and story telling with a clear evolutionary trail (and a model) when all the biological facts represented in the context of nutrient chemical-dependent, pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution support the model. No one even challenges the biological facts — as you may have noticed.  And then, last week we saw the news about Ecological selection as the cause and sexual differentiation as the consequence of species divergence? The link is to a free full text representation of the importance of nutrient chemicals and pheromones to concurrently controlled adaptive evolution of the mandibles and male genitalia of an insect species.

As I detailed using the honeybee model organism, this concurrent control must be due to the epigenetic tweaking of immense gene networks (not random mutations), or these species differences could not have adaptively evolved. And now, despite previous evidence suggesting that sexual selection is the primary driver of species divergence, these researchers provide evidence that ecological divergence precedes sexual divergence. That evidence links Natural Selection for nutrient chemical uptake — via development of differences in the mandibles — to sex differences in the development of the male genitalia (i.e., to Sexual Selection in that order).  Sexual selection is linked todivergence in species from microbes to man (with the advent of sexual selection in yeasts that is also nutrient chemical dependent).

It’s the order and concurrent nature of selection: Natural precedes Sexual, that makes it non-random. Bottom up nutrient chemical-dependent selection that precedes top-down control of reproduction in every species is not due to mutations. It’s due to nutrient chemical-dependent, pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution. Did you see the article on olfactory modulation of vision also published last week? I still get a good laugh when people say that people, unlike other animals, are primarily visual creatures because there’s a theory about that.

Comments

comments

James Kohl
Retired medical laboratory scientist

James Kohl




Order by Mail or FAX

Order by Mail or Fax

If you prefer to place your pheromones order by MAIL or FAX, using our printable order form, click here.

Trademarks & Notices: LuvEssentials is not affiliated in any way with WebMD, CNN, Discovery Health. All trademarks and registered trademarks appearing on LuvEssentials are the property of their respective owners.

Orders that were shipped by free USPS Mail and are returned to us will be assessed a return processing fee of $7.00 US Dollars. Orders totaling over $190.00 US Dollars, before any discount, that are returned to us will be assessed a return processing fee of 25%.

Please note, the testimonials we display are all real; however, any photos accompanying these testimonials are stock photography, not actual customers. We do this to protect the privacy of our customers.

Also, in accordance with FTC guidelines, we want to make it explicitly clear that the testimonials we display throughout this website are based on the unique experiences that some of our customers have shared with us. We cannot promise that you will experience similar benefits from using our product. If you are not satisfied with our product for any reason, simply return the product within 60 days for a full refund excluding the costs of shipping and handling. Please contact us with any questions you may have.

James Kohl owns Pheromones.com, and he has published books and award-winning research journal articles about human pheromones. With colleagues he was the first to show that a mixture of human pheromones increases the flirtatious behaviors of women, and increases their level of attraction to the man wearing the mixture - during a real-life social circumstance lasting 15 minutes.

James Kohl was not paid for his endorsement. Nevertheless, he is an affiliate of LuvEssentials.com which means it is possible for him to receive a monetary gain from the sale of LuvEssentials products based on how the visitor arrived at our site.

For testimonials of LuvEssentials products, please visit our testimonials page here or our ebay reviews page here.

To contact us, please click here

Contact Us

Please complete the following form to contact us; we will reply within one business day.
Business days are Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM, EST
The information you are providing here will not be sold or disclosed to any outside party.
(* indicates required fields)

Please contact us by:

Phone:
800.611.3578

Email:
support@luvessentials.com

Mail:
Lodix Corporation
138 Palm Coast Parkway N.E.
Suite 192
Palm Coast, FL 32137


What is the vomeronasal organ (VNO)?

The vomeronasal organ (VNO) is a cone-shaped organ in the nasal cavity, which is believed to be one of the body's receptors of pheromones. More, specifically, the VNO, which is part of the accessory olfactory system in the nose, does not respond to normal scents, but may detect odorless, barely perceptible pheromones.

Other schools of thought believe that it is not the VNO but rather cells in our main olfactory system and their affects on hormones secreted by the hypothalamus that are responsible for the affects of pheromones.

Learn more about the science behind pheromones here.

What are optimized pheromones?

Optimized pheromones are lab-certified pheromone formulations that have the optimum concentration of biologically active pheromones scientifically proven to produce behavior-altering results -- particularly as sexual attractants. Optimized pheromone formulations do not necessarily contain the maximum level of pheromones available on the market, but rather contain the greatest degree (and combination)of human pheromones that trigger a conditioned biological response in humans that, in turn, dictate their sexual behavior. Optimized pheromones also release neurotransmitters that directly modify the behavior of the opposite sex, such as triggering sexual excitement. For example:

Optimized pheromones for men are scientifically proven to bring about an increase in the luteinizing hormone (LH) in women, thereby causing a woman to have a heightened sexual responsiveness to a man. This LH surge elevates a woman's predisposition towards sexual activity.

Optimized pheromones for women are scientifically proven to bring about a biochemical surge in men, thereby causing a man to have a heightened sexual responsiveness to a woman. This biochemical surge is what makes a man fiercely determined to copulate.