Scientists show how roundworm daughter cells remember the histone modification patterns of their parents.
September 18, 2014|
My comment: Strike three, your theories are out.
Does anyone think this latest addition of experimental evidence on heritable histones is not just another thinly-veiled attempt to continue the fight against disease?
I could be wrong. Has someone else shown how mutations and natural selection lead to the evolution of biodiversity via an evolutionary event that has not been described?
If not, these results seem to support other experimental evidence of pheromone-controlled RNA-mediated cell type differentiation via nutrient-dependent amino acid substitutions in cells of individuals of all other species from microbes to man.
Will we next see a serious scientist like Eugene Koonin step in and ask how species diversity arises via mutations in the absence of cell type differentiation that leads to concurrent changes in morphological and behavioral phenotypes? See for example: A universal trend of amino acid gain and loss in protein evolution and Genomes in turmoil: Quantification of genome dynamics in prokaryote supergenomes.
If RNA-mediated events and Genome Dynamics Events are the same thing in species from microbes to man, the likelihood that evolutionary theorists will describe an evolutionary event that links mutations and/or natural selection to the evolution of biodiversity is reduced even further to what may be a statistically impossible event.
Mutations can be linked to pathology but cannot be linked to increasing organismal complexity via perturbed protein folding at the same time that amino acid substitutions stabilize the DNA in organized genomes.
Can anyone else “…conceive of a global external factor that could cause… 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.” I think what everyone continues to show with their experimental evidence is that ecological variation leads to ecological adaptations via nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled RNA-mediated events.
That’s not evolution; is it? If not, the evolutionary theorists have struck out and the Creationists have won the game with their explanations of biologically-based cause and effect.
Indeed, Dobzhansky (1973) may finally make sense to bird-watchers, butterfly-collectors and serious scientists. See for instance his claim in Dobzhansky (1964): “…the only worthwhile biology is molecular biology. All else is “bird watching” or “butterfly collecting.” Bird watching and butterfly collecting are occupations manifestly unworthy of serious scientists!”
Serious scientists have continued to show what Dobzhansky reported in Nothing in Biology Makes Any Sense Except in the Light of Evolution. “…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.” Simply put, that means nothing about evolution makes sense in the light of molecular biology. Nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled amino acid substitutions that differentiate the cell types of all individuals of all species exemplify the fact that we are not the descendents of other apes. Like all other extant species, we have ecologically adapted to ecological variation because species that didn’t adapt don’t exist — except in the fossil record. That suggest the fossil record may not be the best indicator of how quickly ecological speciation occurs. Instead of millions of years, there are examples of ecological speciation in invertebrates and vertebrates that links rapid changes in their morphology and behavior to 9 generations in butterflies, 500 species of fish in 15,000 years in sticklebacks, and biodiversity in a human population that arose in the past 30,000 years in what is now central China.