Summations Only

epigenetis give some of the answers you ask for. only a superscientist could answer all such questions.

NEURO-GENIC EVOLUTION OF SPECIES THEORY
(Why evolution theory needs to be improved)).Although many evolutionists seem satisfied, some of them believe that there is a need for improvement of evolution theory, so to be more comprehensive and acceptable. This need is specially visualized on the following issues, where we can discern a relative obscurity, from the point of view evolution theory. On these themes new scientific research and findings partially oppose classical Darwinian, as well as neo- Darwinian views. In parallel there are a lot of different theoretic views about these issues, which change drastically the scenery.Here I wish to make a notion about science’s wrong general attitude towards knowledge in regard to evolution.
A quick look on bibliography shows easily how much weight had been put by scientists in evolution’s significance over knowledge and learning, in relation to knowledge’s importance over evolution.
In fact you can hardly find a work for the last case. Is this fact an undisputable proof that the second case hasn’t got any truth in it, or that Darwin’s ideas had lead science to this wrong path? I believe the last one had happened.InstinctsDarwin in his Origin of Species. treated instincts as complex reflexes that were made up of inherited units and therefore subject to natural selection..Tinbergen.ethology.wikipediaInstincts are the inherent inclination of a living organism toward a particular behavior. Instinct are the inherent inclination of a living organism toward a particular behavior. The fixed action patterns are unlearned and inherited.One theory on instinct is that the inherent inclination is stored in the DNA and therefore passed from parent to offspring.
Tinbergen. See ethology. D. J. McFarlandSo Instincts are unlearned and inherited units: What exactly are they? Why and how did they come?
They say not by learning, but just by mutations and natural selection. How many of those mutations and how many acts of natural selection, would be needed, so all these fine ingredients of so many different instincts, in their subsequent grades could be created, in conjunction with other somatic adaptation going on in parallel? And imagine a half completed instinct, not at all functional, to wait again and again a random mutation to happen, and then a successful act of natural selection to occur for one step, amongst many others, towards the whole instinct’s formation. This explanation seems to be so be elaborate and improbable. Could computers give the chances of successfully completed such events?Instincts are complex reflexes. There is need for an explanation: how these units come to surf ace reflectively? They need, as any reflex does, a stimulus, a nervous system as mediator and a known in advance process inside the n. system, to connect the stimulus with the unit. So these units to be activated, use exactly the same structures and the same process as, any known learning function. So we have to accept that this reflective activation is a part of learning process. But, if this is so, how somebody can suggest, that these units made from an unlearnt staff, obviously different in structure, finally change nature or simulate learning staff, so to be able to use the pathways of learning procedures and act as a learning process?But we now know that in scientific community other views prevail. We read:
The concept of instinct does not, therefore, entail an inflexible notion of development. On the contrary, it is quite compatible with the idea that developmental outcomes are contingent on environmental conditions, and with the idea that learning plays an important part in development. Dylan Evans
From Oxford companion to the bodyLearning
- Darwin meets Lamarck — the co-evolution of genes and learning Behavioural Inheritance in Evolution
By Eytan Avital
David Yellin College of Education, JerusalemIn this chapter we are going to look at tradition, genes and learning all at once, as they interact during evolution. We have shown in previous chapters how, irrespective of any genetic change, social learning can lead to independent cultural evolution and promote speciation. When the role of the transmission of learnt information is recognised, interpretations of the evolution of many important behaviours are altered. However, for a more complete picture of what happens during behavioural evolution, we need to look at the type of genetic changes that occur during the evolution of the mechanisms of learning and the various forms of memory. We need to know what drives.— that the evolution of learning is, to a large extent, self-propelled.. This body of theory supports the view that the complementary nature of organisms and their environment is not just the result of the single process of adaptation by natural selection. Rather, evolution is a two-way process, in which niche construction and natural selection operate in parallel, but also interact.
Read more: Niche Construction - Evolution from Molecules to Men - Selection, Environment, Organisms, Evolutionary, Environments, and Process
.
The new branch of research on epigenetics has overturned our established concepts about learning and evolution and new advances are expected to be made. We read:Most epigenetic changes only occur within the course of one individual organism's lifetime, but, if a mutation in the DNA has been caused in sperm or egg cell that results in fertilization, then some epigenetic changes are inherited from one generation to the next.[9] This raises the question of whether or not epigenetic changes in an organism can alter the basic structure of its DNA (see Evolution, below), a form of Lamarckism. Wikipedia. Molecular basis of epigenetics.Epigenetic changes of this type thus have the potential to direct increased frequencies of permanent genetic mutation. DNA methylation patterns are known to be established and modified in response to environmental factors by a complex interplay of at least three independent DNA methyltransferases
Wikipedia. epigenetics. mechanismIt has also been speculated that organisms may take advantage of differential mutation rates associated with epigenetic features to control the mutation rates of particular genes.[37] Interestingly, recent analysis have suggested that members of the APOBEC family of cytosine deaminases are capable of simultaneously mediating genetic and epigenetic inheritance using similar molecular mechanism
Wikipedia. evolutionthe "rules governing physiological regulation and cellular and higher levels of organization are located not in the genome, but in interactive epigenetic networks which themselves organize genomic response to environmental signaling" (Strohman, R. 1994. Epigenesis: the missing beat in biotechnology? Biotechnology Feb;12(2):156-64) of evolution process and its cessesWhy do I link epigenetics with learning?
Because environmental factors are information, namely learning material, and are those which, during individual’s life span, cause the epigenetic effect.
Darwin accepts interact between environment and organism only during individual lifespan, so any basic change in organism can take place only by natural selection and mutations. He uses this artificial time factor to adaptation evolution and finally to life itself and I think this is utterly wrong. Life, learning and evolution are strong natural powers and it is improbable that they follow time factors. It is only logical to expect that they follow the most potent factor, that of continuity, from the appearance of first organic proteins up to mankind. This continuum of evolution is succeeded, apart from epigenetics mainly, by deeper learning mechanisms (empathic transfer, intelligent communication), unstoppably transferring evolutional learning material through generations to genome.
At phylogenic stage these mechanisms, together with natural selection and mutations are working in parallel. In the case of mutations we think that epigenetic information may have an enhancing role, by reducing stableness of DNA bonds, or by increasing the rate of mutations, as epigenetics suggest (Wikipedia).Darwin excludes that learning can change DNA. Today epigenetics leave the door open, carefully though, to this possibility. Biologists wonder if perigenome changes are enough to explain new species creation. DNA change can happen over million years. So proof is difficult. But this doesn’t give the right to anybody to aphoristically exclude it.On other hand empathy and intelligent communication (basic learning mechanisms) can work over millions of years, alone or in conjunction with mutations and natural selection, so to be able to lead to basic changes in species.At the same moment information reception and diffusion inside the organism is
As we know N.S, even primordial one, has memory, accumulated and classified, so it is logical to think that accumulated information-irritations of same nature, but always having the element of danger and discontent, when reaching a critical
l Empathy and intelligent communication.I may am wrong, but I think there isn’t any scientific work on empathy’s significance to species evolution.
Empathy was not known to Darwin. Not the mirror neurons either. I think that evolutionists had not given the proper importance to these two knowledge transfer mechanisms.Intelligent communication is learning mechanism working with empathy in higher organisms, with relatively grown up central neural system, by which parents teach siblings and give them useful knowledge.
I think they are the missing link of nature’s continuity from learning to species evolution. As they can transfer knowledge from generation to generation, are also able to act and cause changes on basic genome structures), that could lead, in cooperation, or not, with mutations and natural selection, to new species. So, as I suppose that Darwin didn’t know about empathy, it was not improbable of him to eliminate learning’s importance to evolution process. But we now know. And we know that empathy, more so in lower animals and intelligent communication in higher ones, and at the same time working in combination, they are very important evolution factors, as they transfer so useful information from generation to generation and have been neglected so far.Mirror neurons. This finding has substantiated empathy’s significance.Punctuated equilibrium and stasis.These concepts are obviously in contrast of Darwin’s basic idea of gradual species change.Thus punctuated equilibrium contradicts some of Darwin's ideas regarding the specific mechanisms of evolution, but generally accords with Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection.[42]Eldredge and Gould proposed that the degree of gradualism commonly attributed to Charles Darwin is virtually nonexistent in the fossil record, and that stasis dominates the history of most fossil speciesDarwin had noted on his 1844 Essay, "Better begin with this: If species really, after catastrophes, created in showers world over, my theory false."[42]REST OF MY THEORY AT NEXT MESSAGESEdited by zi ko, : quotation letters and my own words are same. A big part of my theory has been omittedEdited by zi ko, : No reason given.Edited by zi ko, : half of my work has been omitted

Recent work in developmental biology has identified dynamical and physical mechanisms of tissue morphogenesis that may underlie abrupt morphological transitions during evolution. Consequently, consideration of mechanisms of phylogenetic change that have been found in reality to be non-gradual is increasingly common in the field of evolutionary developmental biology, particularly in studies of the origin of morphological novelty.I was not able to understand how Darwin gave the needed answer by just saying that periods in which species were stable, have been longer than those that species have undergone modifications, and more so, as the law of big numbers would make this gradualness very evident? According to my theory answer is simple: environment changes push for evolution. So organisms understand environmental forces and react to them, and in collaboration with mutations and natural selection this process leads to new species. In this way we can understand how punctuated equilibrium generally accords with evolution. Darwin’s ambivalence on the matter is obvious. After him, different other explanations given are so elaborate..Rapid modes of evolution:
What is the response by Darwinism or new- Darwinism?
My theory does not have as before any difficulty to answer.MY THEORYFrom early beginning on species scale we see the appearance of primitive neural tissue. Up to now we think of this tissue as another one amongst other tissues of an organism, parallel evolved, and its function restricted to transfer informative staff from environment to inner organs from organ to organ, inside the body, and to regulate their functions.
But it is known, from epigenetics, that exactly these functions, specially the first one, are they who very clearly relate with the mechanisms that cause phenotypic changes, during organism’s life spans. More than this, we now know, again from epigenetics, that there are chromosome and phenotypic changes that last for more than one generation, and if it happens that there are, at the same time, relevant random mutations, then permanent changes on genome or genotype occur. On top of this there are arguments that perigenome changes, by themselves alone, may be in some or more cases enough for new species to develop. Also there is the possibility that environmental knowledge may prove in future to facilitate mutations and, working together with natural selection, to speed evolution.It is important to clear up the issue of knowledge transference between generations in animals. There are two ways, according to my theory, to such function. Information from generation to generation can be passed through intelligent communication and empathy. Transferred knowledge through generations is very important for evolution, because, as it is repetitively happening over long periods of time, thousands or millions of years, it ends to genome, where it can lead to new instinct or organ formation.Intelligent communication : there are two types of such communication.1)It diffuses to other members of next generation and brings to surface already acquired instinctual knowledge, through sounds, moves, body language, behavior, paradigms, etc. 2) newly acquired by a member knowledge that improvises an instinctual behavior. This knowledge is propagated to members of same and next generations
and to paths towards genome to improve instinct or to create a new organ.
This last type of knowledge is transferred over long periods of time (thousands or millions of years), backed up by empathy, enriched on its way by new experiences and information. These types of knowledge transfer are taking place mainly in higher animals with quite evolved neural system and it is always backed up by empathy.Empathy: It is the more important from the point of view of value to evolution between those two. It works in both, lower and higher animals, and transfers knowledge mainly through generations, but as well between members of same generation. I may be wrong, but I think it hadn’t been any scientific work on empathy’s significance to species evolution. I find it very strange. Empathic (both emotional and cognitive) transmission regards a very important part of transferred information through generations, not to be given any evolutional significance. I think it is the one, most significant, of two missing link factors of nature’s continuity from learning to species evolution. As empathy and intelligent communication can, and in fact they transfer knowledge staff from generation to generation over millions of years, it is of course logical to anybody to accept also that this staff is able to act and cause changes on basic genome structures (DNA?), that could lead, in cooperation with mutations and natural selection, or just by itself alone, to new species.
Empathy was not known to Darwin. Not the mirror neurons either. I think that evolutionists and scientists in general, had not given the proper importance to empathy, as regards evolution. But we now know. And we know that empathy is taking place not only in upper animals, but also in simple ones, and it must be a very important evolution factor, as it transfers, with intelligent communication, so useful knowledge acquired during individual’s life span through generation s, that up to now we knew it has effect only to perigenome. This knowledge refers, and not only, to frmation of instincts, of which their presence, up to now, has been a mystery, but also to species evolution in general.Empathic transferring refers mainly to emotionally colored knowledge, which has survival value for organism. This concept of transferred empathy,(together with intelligent communication ),I repeat, is very important for somebody, to understand how learning and knowledge can affect basic genome structures and cause appearance of new species. Its significance lies on the fact that, this knowledge staff can be transferred to next generations, where if it gets reinforced, it acts on genome, after many successive generations.
In their turn, new generations will modify this knowledge according to their experiences, inside again neural system, before again transferring it, and so on. After maybe some thousands or millions of times, gradually, the end result will be a new being.
This concept of empathy also discerns my theory from Lamarckism. It gives a new instrument to explain how information reaches and effects genome.
Locating mirror neurons gave substance to this claim and I believe enhanced empathy’s significance. All this new knowledge was unknown to Darwin, so that he could not easily think that environment’s change knowledge could have such deep impact on genome, through long lasting learning effect.
(Somebody may think that I use the words information, learning, knowledge, in somehow a loose way. Obviously these words correlate to each other. But in the context of my theory they have some differences.
Information is the simple external or internal stimuli that neuron cells accept. Learning is the process that takes place inside the whole neural system, after stimulus had entered, in order information to be transferred, memorized, validated and coded. Knowledge is the end result of the two previous functions. It has an emotional factor for organism, which relates to survival value of the information. It is this part that advances towards genome area, and the one that that mainly can be transferred through empathy and intelligent communication. This is a schematic division. In fact an interexchange between them happens all time.)All above mentioned processes take place inside neural system. There is no question about it. But as I have said before, information after it had entered neural system, it is coded, validated, emotionally colored and memorized. This means that neural system takes an energetic role in the process, during individual’s life span. It chooses between information that is useful or not, understands dangers, threats, or chances, learns from mistakes or successes, choose actions of response, plan, etc, before deciding what to transfer and suggest, by empathy and intelligent communication, to next generations, and so to genome, for new instincts, new organs, to be formed, etc. It is I think quite evident that instincts are formed gradually by this way and so they are learnt complex patterns of behavior, which at the end take the features of reflective activity.
In their turn, new generations will modify this knowledge according to their experiences, inside again neural system, before again transferring it, and so on. After maybe some thousands or millions of times, gradually, the end result will be a new being.After all these can we speak of the neuro-genic factor in evolution as the third factor, together with mutations and natural selection in species and of neuro-genic evolution?So according to my theory, when we talk about evolution we mean firstly and mostly of neural changes caused by new information, new knowledge new feelings. It cannot be any phenotypic or genotypic change, before a relative neuronal change takes place.If environmental changes are continuous, and tense, but not lethal, they will at the end lead to the process of evolution, thanks to nervous system. In upper class organisms gradually central nervous system is formulated and takes its central role. It can make more complex actions, as foresee threats, choose complicated defiance or attacking tactics, find solution in difficult situations, etc. This of course widens the scope and role of N.S.Finding solutions by using animal’s own abilities, is a way of conserving existing genotype. Otherwise, if the problem is not being solved, evolution mechanism gets started. This applies to both lower and upper scale animalsREST OF MY THEORY IN NEXT MESSAGEEdited by zi ko, : Half work omitted

This thinking neural system can easily give answers and explain all the questions I had put about instincts, learning, punctuated equilibrium, stasis, at the beginning of my work. Also my theory fits well with new scientific findings about epigenetics; empathy, mirror cells, prevailing tendencies at present times in research works about learning.Instincts: they are based on learned behavioral patterns, which, because of very frequent repetitions became reflective. In any instinct we have the stimulus, the nervous system’s mediation and the response. In first place this arc it is repeatedly taking place during individual’s life, repeated many times over succeeding generations, while on the same time its context is transferred through empathy and intelligent communication to next generations, where it is reinforced and enriched, and after many generations is transferred to genomes, to become permanent.According to my theory all instincts are ancient knowledge collected by neural tissue, transferred by empathy (more often in lower animals) and combined with intelligent communication, (more often in higher ones), transmitted by neural system up to genome and inherited through DNA. I think that knowledge curried by instincts and knowledge acquired during every day’s life experiences is interpenetrating each other. This complies with general rule of continuity of evolution in life. Controversies about what is the nature of instincts, which are instincts and which are not, how they are inherited and so on, now are easily solved. There is a gradual evolvement of instinctive behavior from more to less of reflective features and of less to more of intellect intervention.Also, by my theory, we can understand and explain how animals have developed such compound instinctive abilities and tactics about defiance, attacking, survival in general, where natural selection and mutations are, in my opinion, very poor to give us convincing answers. How, for example, can they explain the ability of a species of crow to use special longish rugged leafs of special plant, with their incisions having the appropriate direction, so to take out insects from their deep hole-nests? Anybody can imagine the innumerable numbers of successive random, usually unsuccessful and very rarely successful, mutations this bird would had need, so to get all those fine degrees of ingredients of this instinctive behavior. And, we have to remember that organism has so many instinctive types of behavior to conquer by mutations and natural selection, apart those needed for its physical evolution. Now knowledge transference is the key word for understanding the formation of these learnt instinctual and intelligent actions.Learning: Knowledge transfer from one generation to the next is a key word to understand species evolution. Although evolution of learning had thoroughly been studied by scientists, very little work has been done on learning’s effect on evolution, which I think is most important of the two. Apart from perigenome changes through epigenetics, random mutations and natural selection, the main way to evolution is through repeatedly knowledge transfer from environment to genome during successive generations. This causes genome changes that lead to new instincts, organs and beings, with help or not from mutations and natural selection.
Intelligent communication and empathy are the main learning mechanism through which knowledge is transferred trough successive generations to genome.Punctuated equilibrium and stasis: When environmental changes are intense and they threat organism’s survival, neural system sends intense messages to individual peripheral genome through epigenesis and, through empathy and intelligent communication, to next generations towards basic genome, in order to accelerate changes to support survival. .On the other hand on period s of stable environments no changes occur (stasis). No need for elaborate explanations and ambivalent views.Plants. Here we haven’t neural system. But plants have hormones and pollen as ways of internal and external communication system. Couldn’t they stand for neural system?
On the other hand we read in epigenetics:
While plants do utilise many of the same epigenetic mechanisms as animals, such as chromatin remodeling, it has been hypothesised that plant cells do not have "memories", resetting their gene expression patterns at each cell division using positional information from the environment and surrounding cells to determine their fate.[33]One cell organisms.
When we come to one cell organisms, we can’t use of course neurogenic evolution theory. But we can expand the basis of my hypothesis, so to include neurogenic theory as well: in neuro-genic theory I treated knowledge as an enriched information, which is the corner stone of evolution. The same idea applies to one cell organisms. Information from environment meats living cell and causes a simple reaction. This reaction has an effect on inner parts of the cell and other cells near it. So we have here in away a mode of learning arc, where neural system is substituted by chemical or biological reactions.Proteins
Proteins in a living cell have the ability to react to stimuli (information) and convey a type of information from its one end to the other, and to its near substances. This is how differentiation —adaptation begins.So, material and information are the cornerstones of life and consequently of evolution. They form life’s basic dipole. Both are equally important for life.Now we have to answer to the inevitable question: Who has made information so important?
And the answer is: the One who has made universe and has put universe laws. Significance of function of information is a universal law for life, equivalent to others.It is evident that neural system’s role in the above process is crucial. Neural tissue isn’t just another tissue amongst others. It ‘thinks, supervises, decides ‘rules evolution, and at the end life. It is being acting like God. But if this is the case, who does put the rules for its own evolution? Is it auto-regulated? Is its thinking a result of its own evolution? OR.This is what I mean by saying that my theory brings closer evolutionists and creationists. Now at least we can know where exactly their difference lies and where biology could search and may give, or not, the final solution to the Big Question.Z. K
E mail: zikont@hotmail.com

One cell organisms.
Feeding substance or the lack of it, or irritants met on environment stand for sources of information. This type of information causes production of chemicals that lead to simple reaction of parts of the cell (genome, natural genetic engineering systems) or the whole of it. So we have here in away a mode of learning arc, where neural system is substituted by chemicals or the above systems. In this case the reaction arc and the learning arc are the same Knowing the changes (by empathy), other members "learn" what to "do" to overcome in the long run, in many generations, the challenge.

Yes i needed a lot of relative knowledge, not just a book of the theory. I am wrong in the context that Darwinists believe that evolution takes place. But am i wrong according to following?
A Biochemical Mechanism for Nonrandom Mutations and Evolution
Barbara E. Wright*
Division of Biological Sciences, The University of Montana." As this minireview is concerned with the importance of the environment in directing evolution, it is appropriate to remember that Lamarck was the first to clearly articulate a consistent theory of gradual evolution from the simplest of species to the most complex, culminating in the origin of mankind (71). He published his remarkable and courageous theory in 1809, the year of Darwin's birth. Unfortunately, Lamarck's major contributions have been overshadowed by his views on the inheritance of acquired characters. In fact, Darwin shared some of these same views, and even Weismann (106), the father of neo-Darwinism, decided late in his career that directed variation must be invoked to understand some phenomena, as random variation and selection alone are not a sufficient explanation (71). This minireview will describe mechanisms of mutation that are not random and can accelerate the process of evolution in specific directions. The existence of such mechanisms has been predicted by mathematicians (6) who argue that, if every mutation were really random and had to be tested against the environment for selection or rejection, there would not have been enough time to evolve the extremely complex biochemical networks and regulatory mechanisms found in organisms today. Dobzhansky (21) expressed similar views by stating "The most serious objection to the modern theory of evolution is that since mutations occur by `chance' and are undirected, it is difficult to see how mutation and selection can add up to the formation of such beautifully balanced organs as, for example, the human eye."
As i can see from above there aren't absolute truths on this field. In any case my theory has to be tested against facts and hard scientific findings and not old beliefs that time renders them more and more shaky. Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.

---

Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.

Is is untrue according to your theory you believe. But what about according to the following?
A Biochemical Mechanism for Nonrandom Mutations and Evolution
Barbara E. Wright*
Division of Biological Sciences, The University of Montana." As this minireview is concerned with the importance of the environment in directing evolution, it is appropriate to remember that Lamarck was the first to clearly articulate a consistent theory of gradual evolution from the simplest of species to the most complex, culminating in the origin of mankind (71). He published his remarkable and courageous theory in 1809, the year of Darwin's birth. Unfortunately, Lamarck's major contributions have been overshadowed by his views on the inheritance of acquired characters. In fact, Darwin shared some of these same views, and even Weismann (106), the father of neo-Darwinism, decided late in his career that directed variation must be invoked to understand some phenomena, as random variation and selection alone are not a sufficient explanation (71). This minireview will describe mechanisms of mutation that are not random and can accelerate the process of evolution in specific directions. The existence of such mechanisms has been predicted by mathematicians (6) who argue that, if every mutation were really random and had to be tested against the environment for selection or rejection, there would not have been enough time to evolve the extremely complex biochemical networks and regulatory mechanisms found in organisms today. Dobzhansky (21) expressed similar views by stating "The most serious objection to the modern theory of evolution is that since mutations occur by `chance' and are undirected, it is difficult to see how mutation and selection can add up to the formation of such beautifully balanced organs as, for example, the human eye."
As i can see from above there aren't yet absolute truths on this field. In any case my theory has to be tested against facts and hard scientific findings and not old beliefs that time renders them more and more shaky.Edited by zi ko, 06-19-2011 12:31 PM: No reason given.

---

Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.

Idon't remember having discussed in this thread this page again. B Wright is quite clear in her sayings. Even you (amongst Darwin,Weisman,, Shapiro ect) accept 'that organisms have mechanisms that allow a Lamarckian-like adaptation to the environment", as you seem to agree that tere are such mechanisms.Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.

---

Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.

What i understand from your commenting on B. Wright's work, is that you admitt , at least on the bacterial level, there is a mechanism that directs evolution through mutation and NS towards useful paths. In this mechanism obviously information from environment is an essential element.If we do accept such a mehcanism in the bacterial level, it is not logical i thik to denay it to the polycellular organisms, where there is a complex neural system to serve this purpose. From this point it we are easily lead to my neurogenic theory of evolution.( http://www.sleepgadgetabs.com). I would be much obliged if you can comment on it

---

Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.

Spindle neurons and parallel evolution it is not a problem between evoutionists and creationists. It could be only a problem between evolutionists. Admitting that fuctionally driven evolution does not need intervention by a Creator. It just support that evolution is information driven.Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.

---

Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.

The problem is not if the system 'directs' mutation in a weak or strong sense, but if it does exist or not. You can deny it. But then you should bring evidence against it. If it exists, we can next discuss how strong or weak its effect might be. But how it is logical as you seem not to accept it? ( you said i misunderstood you). If you accept it then you have to explain why a useful mechanism in protozoa has to be excluded( enriched of course) in metazoa.
Yes as i know there isn't such mechanism known up to now, but this doesn't mean that it couldn't exist. As this is a new theory, with entirely new ideas, you can't expect me to cite differeent relevant scientific worcs to edorse my claims. It is only simple logic on which i rely to think that neural system is the theater all this does happen, and it must have these (unknown yet) mechanisms to accomplish the job.Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.

---

Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.

But ithink, i am not sure, B-cells in next generations are more prone to produce antibodies, specally if the reason of this production is repeated again and again.Otherwise this 'experience' will be in vain and it could be againnst nature;s economy law and so illogical.

---

Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.

Here is where my theory offers a different answer:
Neural system being the intermediator, passes information between sperm/ova and somatic cells .

---

Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.

It is true. There is not any evidence at the moment .It might be in the future, or it might never be.It is exactly where falsfiability of a theory or idea is applied. Presently i can only see that ALL findings ln genetic biology dp not contradict with my theory.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.

Falsifiability is such an interesting concept: for a hypothesis to get off the ground it needs to be falsifiable. This means we need a null hypothesis.What is your null hypothesis? If you don't know how a null hypothesis relates to a hypothesis you have no business using the word falsify.I don't think you know what it means: prove me wrong. ------------------------------------------------------------------
I quote from Rationalwikie.
Falsifiability is the ability of a theorya working framework for explaining and predicting natural phenomenato be disproved by an experiment or observation.[1] The ability to evaluate theories against observations is essential to the scientific method, and as such, the falsifiability of theories is key to this and is the prime test for whether a proposition or theory can be described as scientific. Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.

---

Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.