Where is the proof in pseudoscience?
One week ago, I thought the discussion of pseudoscience was about to end. See: Proof of social pseudoscience
It continued long enough for one of the participants to write:
“1. What model? You haven’t given one. 2. Niche construction is suggestive of an underlying intelligence.”
In my model, niche construction is not merely suggestive of an underlying intelligence and ‘intelligenesis’ — i.e., the Creation of human intelligence.
After another week of irreverent banter, here’s my response on the issue of niche construction as proof of Creation.
I quoted from: Kohl (2013) Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model. https://www.socioa…53/27989
“This model details how chemical ecology drives adaptive evolution via: (1) ecological niche construction, (2) social niche construction, (3) neurogenic niche construction, and (4) socio-cognitive niche construction.”
Niche construction is proof of Creation. It also is proof that mutation-initiated natural selection is pseudoscience, since no experimental evidence attests to the ability of mutations to enable any level of the niche construction required for increased organismal complexity.
Creation of olfactory receptor genes links the epigenetic landscape to the physical landscape of DNA in the organized genomes of species from microbes to man, which is why niche construction is suggestive of an underlying intelligence.
The link from the epigenetic landscape to the physical landscape of DNA is the holy grail of evolutionary biology. Thus, unless you’re a social pseudoscientist or idiot minion of one, the holy grail of evolutionary biology is Creation.
Summary of the discussion: The biological plausibility and ecological validity of Laws of Biology
Life is nutrient-dependent. The ecological origin of all biological laws is apparent 1) in the context of systems biology; 2) in the context of the metabolism of nutrients by microbes; and 3) in the context of how the metabolism of nutrients results in species-specific pheromones that control the physiology of reproduction. Taken together, the systems biology of nutrient metabolism to species-specific pheromones, which control the physiology of reproduction, can be expressed in two Laws of Biology: 1) Life is nutrient-dependent (see Kohl, 2012) and 2) The physiology of reproduction is pheromone-controlled (see Kohl, 2013).
Kohl (2012) https://www.socioa…53/27989
Kohl (2013) https://www.socioa…38/20758
Idiot minions want you to believe that mutation-initiated natural selection causes evolution. They do not want you to look at the experimental evidence of ecological adaptations, and they do not want others to look at it.
Ecological variation is the raw material by which natural selection can drive evolutionary divergence [1–4].
https://rspb.royal…abstract
Ecological theory suggests that if species are too similar in their resource use, one will out-compete the others; hence, neighboring species must exploit different niches if they are to coexist.
https://www.scienc…35.short
The role of ecological variation in driving divergence of sexual and non-sexual traits in the red-backed fairy-wren (Malurus melanocephalus)
https://www.biomed…48/13/75
Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2014-01-proof-pseudoscience.html#jCp
