Physics and Chemistry and Biology = Ecological adaptations
March 30, 2014 | James Kohl
Malcolm McConville published 3/28/14
Excerpt: “The revival in interest in metabolism has been particularly apparent to those of us who work on microbial pathogens. These organisms are in a constant war with their host over access to carbon sources and nutrients and, like other cells, need to tailor their metabolism to fulfill particular tasks, such as the synthesis of specialized virulence factors or the maintenance of their energy/redox state in inhospitable environments.”
My comment: The metabolism of nutrients to species-specific pheromones controls the physiology of reproduction in species from microbes to man.
Jay R. Feierman, who is the moderator of the ISHE’s human ethology yahoo group, has prevented dissemination of accurate information about biologically-based cause and effect for more than 7 years. He has no understanding of ecological adaptations and does not seem to realize that Darwin’s ‘conditions of life’ are nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled.
Jay R. Feierman: “Variation is not nutrient availability and the something that is doing the selecting is not the individual organism. A feature of an educated person is to realize what they do not know. Sadly, you don’t know that you have an incorrect understanding Darwinian [of] biological evolution.”
My comment: Like many other theorists, Feierman has not learned anything new about the biology of behavior during the past few decades. Only now has it become perfectly clear how much misinformation the theorists continue to contribute to discussions due to their ignorance.
For an example of what theorists have not learned about physics see: Natural process – Natural selection
For an example of what theorists have not learned about chemistry see: The role of information in cell regulation
Excerpt: “This regulatory information emerges as the peptide folds into a tertiary structure in much the same way as enzymic activity emerges under the same circumstances.”
For an example of what theorists have not learned about biology see: The role of ecological opportunity in shaping disparate diversification trajectories in a bicontinental primate radiation
Excerpt: “Exceptional species and phenotypic diversity commonly are attributed to ecological opportunity (EO).”
For more information on what people like Feierman and other evolutionary theorists do not know, or do not want others to learn, see: Genes without prominence: a reappraisal of the foundations of biology (pdf opens here).
Excerpt: “The ecosystem, therefore, has a role in the emergence of phenotype at the organism and cellular levels, as indeed, organisms play a role in the evolution of the ecosystem by, for example, creating niches for other species to exploit. In conventional biology, genetic variation is proposed to account for adaptation to environment, and speciation; in the model presented here, it is the variation in the deployment of proteins contributing to the attractor and the possibility of attractor transitions stimulated by stress from the environment that are responsible for macroevolution, i.e. speciation .”
For discussion of the only biologically plausible, ecologically validated model of biophysically constrained species diversity see the article by science journalist and geneticist Dr. Ricki Lewis on her blog at A Challenge to the Supremacy of DNA as the Genetic Material.
For discussion of pseudoscientific nonsense, see any evolutionary psychology Facebook page or yahoo group like the ISHE’s yahoo group. For a book-length misrepresentation of physics and chemistry and biology see: Mutation-Driven Evolution.
Excerpt: “For example, PZ Myers (Associate Professor of Biology at the University of Minnesota, Morris) referred to Stephen C. Meyer’s (a Cambridge trained philosopher of science and professor at Whitworth College from which he graduated with a degree in physics and earth science) book Signature in the Cell as “Discovery Institute Bulldung” and asserted that “Stephen Meyer lies.” This was whilst admitting that he had not read the book. This, by the way, is the same PZ Myers who critiqued Vox Day’s book The Irrational Atheist: Dissecting the Unholy Trinity of Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens having, at least, read parts of it. But why disparage Meyers personally and his book without reading it? PZ Myers stated, “I know what is in this book—…”
My comment: Here’s information about my encounter with PZ Myers: After 500 posts here, we can now see that people like PZ Myers are those most likely to be so ignorant as to assume that anyone who does not agree with them is a “crank.” They will then continue to assert that anyone who does not agree with them is a crank, and hope that others will join in and attest to the same things for the same reasons.
See also: Ecological variation: the raw material by which natural selection drives evolutionary divergence August 25, 2013 | James Kohl