Summations Only

How? What is the mechanism that allows neurons to specifically mutate DNA? What chemical and physical processes do the neurons have that can conceivably produce these changes?

No it doesn't. How do nerves cause changes in histone packaging and DNA methylation in gametes? What physical or chemical processes do neurons possess that would allow them to make these changes? It only takes a BS meter to tell us that you are making stuff up. It takes a sloppy scientist to push ideas that have no merit and no evidence.

Let's use the lottery as a non-biological example. Let's say that those facing economic hardship are more likely to buy lottery tickets. By doing so, they increase their chance of becoming rich and solving their economic woes. Does this make the results of the lottery "directed"? Does this make the lottery non-random? Because mutations that are beneficial in somatic cells are not transferred to germ cells, those that are used produce the next generation. For example, there is a "directed" mutation system in B-cells that are responsible for producing antibodies. In this system the genes responsible for producing antibodies experience higher rates of random mutations. These mutated antibodies are then displayed on the surface of the cell. When an antigen binds to the antibody the cell is stimulated to replicate and produce more antibody. This process is repeated in each generation of B-cell resulting a population of antibodies that have passed through a process of mutation and selection. However, none of these evolved antibody genes are passed on to the next generation. They occur in somatic cells only, not in the germ line cells (sperm and ova). Each individual has to start from scratch.This is not the case in bacteria. A mutation that confers resistance to antibiotics or bacteriophage, for example, are passed on to the next generation because there is no separation between somatic and germline cells.What you need to keep in mind is how evolution affects a reproducing population over time, not a single individual during its lifetime.

B-cells are terminally differentiated. B-cells never become sperm/ova cells, therefore the mutations that occur in B-cells after birth can not be passed on to offspring. It is that simple. You do not pass on your B-cells to your offspring. Your argument that biology must follow your made up laws of economy are illogical. You can not replace reality with how you think reality should work. In the reality I live in, B-cells do not become sperm, nor are they passed on to the next generation. If you are looking for effeciency in biology then you are going to be left wanting.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

That's not an answer. That is a made-up fantasy.

None of which involves the neural system interacting with germ cells.Also, epigenetics does not change the DNA sequence and is therefore incapable of producing the differences seen between species. For example, the differences between humans and chimps is not due to different patterns of DNA methylation and histone packaging. The differences between humans and chimps is due to a difference in DNA sequence. We have been waiting for you to present a mechanism by which this can happen. Turning your fantasies into questions does not stop them from being fantasies.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

Do you understand what epigenetics does? Can epigenetics explain the differences between humans and chimps? If not, then your "theory" is useless for explaining the differences between species, and is in no way a valid replacement for the current theory of evolution which does explain the differences. How is it being done by the neural system? The burden of proof is on you. Your mechanism is incapable of producing the differences seen between species. Shouldn't you find this out before claiming that this data does exist? Usually, a theory starts with observations. So where are the observations?

You are shifting the burden of proof. You are the one claiming that neural tissue guides mutation in germ line cells. Either evidence this claim or withdraw it.

Through what information? Be specific, include data, and include mechanisms.

You would need to relate how a car produces rainbows if you claimed that cars are responsible for rainbows.You claim that neural cells guide mutations in germ cells. Either evidence the claim or withdraw it.

Once again, epigenetics does not explain the difference between species. The theory you are trying to replace DOES explain the differences between species. You seem to have a problem here.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

No one is doubting that empathy exists. What we doubt is that empathy produces specific and beneficial changes in the DNA sequence of sperm and ova.Using my analogy above, we are not doubting the existence of cars or rainbows just as we do not doubt mutations or empathy. What we doubt is the claim that cars CAUSE rainbows just as we doubt that empathy guides mutations.

Umm, yes it is.

You should learn to use Ctrl+F. A simple search for the word "evidence" would have lead you to this section:

quote:

---

Essential criteria

​

The defining characteristic of a scientific theory is that it makes falsifiable or testable predictions. The relevance and specificity of those predictions determine how potentially useful the theory is. A would-be theory that makes no predictions that can be observed is not a useful theory. Predictions not sufficiently specific to be tested are similarly not useful. In both cases, the term "theory" is hardly applicable.

​

In practice a body of descriptions of knowledge is usually only called a theory once it has a minimum empirical basis, according to certain criteria:

​

* It is consistent with pre-existing theory, to the extent the pre-existing theory was experimentally verified, though it will often show pre-existing theory to be wrong in an exact sense.

​

*It is supported by many strands of evidence, rather than a single foundation, ensuring it is probably a good approximation, if not totally correct.

---

It is sloppy work like this which makes us doubt that your speculations hold merit.I will agree that many speculations have become solid scientific theories. However, it took evidence and testing for those speculations to become theories. You have not even proposed a testable hypothesis yet, so you have failed to provide testable predictions and evidence which Wikipedia definition states that a scientific theory requires.

How do differences in lifestyle specifically guide the process of mutagenesis in germ cells so that specific beneficial mutations are produced? You keep forgetting what your speculation actually is.