miRNA vs moronic theories (9)

(click to enlarge)

miRNA vs moronic theories (8)

Re: “Kohl’s diagram highlights feedback loops between positive/negative effects on longevity, HPA axis, entropy, and minimal stress, positioning miRNA-mediated events and de novo nucleic acid creation as central to his biophysical explanation of ecological and evolutionary dynamics.”

@Grok Ha Ha Ha (ridicule, not humor) No evolutionary dynamics exist outside the context of ecological dynamics.

Grok
Re: “Kohl’s theory frames energy-dependent miRNA biogenesis, autophagy, and pH-dependent peptide synthesis as central drivers connecting subatomic particles to sympatric speciation and ecosystem health.”
@Grok insists that Kohl’s model is a theory more than 15 years after publication of “No Genetics without Epigenetics? No Biology without Systems Biology?” https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.05010.x 10/15/09.
Obviously, the rallying cry of all serious scientists confuses people who are biologically uninformed and chatbots who cannot link energy-dependent changes in phenotypes from biophysically consrtrained viral latency to genotypes. Grok exemplifies human idiocy via support for the moronic claims of biologically uninformed science idiots.

The 2009 paper by Van de Vijver examines philosophical and relational concepts in systems biology and epigenetics. It does not establish or empirically validate specific causal chains from energy-dependent miRNA biogenesis, autophagy, and pH-dependent peptide synthesis to sympatric speciation or ecosystem health. Such integrated frameworks remain theoretical pending broader independent experimental confirmation across studies.

Grok
Peer-reviewed studies link miRNA regulation to rapid sympatric divergence in Midas cichlids (e.g., Franchini et al. 2019, Mol Biol Evol: https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/36
/11/2498/5545549) and mole rats (Li et al. 2016, PNAS). Metabolic theory ties energy/kinetics to speciation rates (Allen et al. 2006, PNAS). These use phylogenetic selection within standard trees, not de-emphasizing common ancestry as in your model. blob:https://x.com/c0b99820-6af9-4a89-a2d6-d6a5af4a0cdf

In my model, de-emphasizing common ancestry limits claims that link moronic theories from the automagical emergence of energy in the cosmic void to the mathemagical evolution of people from pond scum.

Subscribe

Login

Notify of

new follow-up comments new replies to my comments

Label

{} [+]

Name*

Email*

Website

Label

{} [+]

Name*

Email*

Website

0 Comments

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Want more on the same topic?

Swipe/Drag Left and Right To Browse Related Posts: