This is an open access article. Any advocate of adaptive evolution via random mutations can attempt to find evidence that I could not find by scanning it.
Is there a simpler “proof” that makes those who think that random mutations cause adaptive evolution appear even more ridiculous?
Shall we attribute to him the inability to see that metabolism and epigenetics converge with food odors and the metabolism of nutrient chemicals to pheromones that act on precisely the same molecular mechanisms of adaptive evolution found in species from microbes to man?
a model for adaptive evolution, for example, that is not nutrient chemical-dependent and pheromone-controlled?
the only thing wrong with mathematical models of cause and effect is that they attribute indirect genetic effects, direct genetic effects, and affects on behavior to something unknown
theorists argue that the 4.5 million interactive DNA switches in the human genome evolved via random mutations.
By the time you get to 4 or 5 million nutrient-chemical and pheromone-controlled DNA switches in the human genome
This model of systems biology (“biological embedding”) represents: Nutrient chemical-dependent and social stress-induced intracellular changes in microRNA and messenger RNA homeostasis