Summations Only

When i see a car working , i suppose i don't need to relate how is is working to be able to say that cars exist.

---

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

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.

My observation on which i based my theory was that neural system unquestionably transfers information from environment to genome area during epigenetic functions. thjs is accepted by all. This fact and its mechanism i am not obliged to prove. Somebody can say wrightly that my theory is incomplete. I have to prove that information alone or information through empathy can affect DNA sequence.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.

Re: DOUPTING IS THE BEAUTY OF SCIENCE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- May i suppose that you accept there is a car (the mechanism that i need not to prove its existance)?After having agreed on this we can procced further.
Let's see if my claims are like rainbows.Maybe my idea about empathy is wrong. OK. It can be proved and then can be neglected. That is falsifiability of a theory. What is like rainbow?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

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

This is the falacious part, zi ko. No one has observed or documented neural functions as a vector for genetic change. It is not accepted by anyone.I think you need to re-read your sources with a more critical eye.And if I may, please. Your web site is a bit hard to read. When I view it there are complete sentences with no spacing whatsoever.I understand English is not your native language (though you do express yourself well enough) and as such this detracts from your presentation. I suggest you have a friend more familiar with English edit your web page for proper English mechanics. This will help with making your speculation (errant as it is ) more clear for us.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

You are right about my language.
My website has abroblem with pasting. Unfortunately i saw it rather lately. Thank you anyway for telling me. this is a crucial point. I agree, nobody has written anything about neural function as a vector for genetic change positively or negatively.But i quote from wikipedia:"Development
Somatic epigenetic inheritance, particularly through DNA methylation and chromatin remodeling, is very important in the development of multicellular eukaryotic organisms. The genome sequence is static (with some notable exceptions), but cells differentiate into many different types, which perform different functions, and respond differently to the environment and intercellular signalling.(bolding is mine)""EVOLUTION
Epigenetic changes have also been observed to occur in response to environmental exposure""The "Baldwin effect" is better understood in evo-devo (evolutionary developmental biology) literature as a scenario in which a character or trait change occurring in an organism as a result of its interaction with its environment becomes gradually assimilated into its developmental genetic or epigenetic repertoire (Simpson, 1953; Newman, 2002). In the words of Daniel Dennett,"All these make me, legitimately i think to believe that generally it is accepted as a fact the idea of information flow from environmen to genome and nobody had changed my mind up to now.In message 174 about the same subject was dealt. My comments were not answered yet. I am waiting.

Tank you for informing me. It seems there is a problem in pasting.Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.

---

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

I assume you meant your Message 173.I thought Wounded King's response to part of your message (in Message 174) was more than adequate.I addressed the rest of your message in my Message 175. What these studies show is that DNA methylation and chromatin remodeling can activate some genes and quiesce others in response to various external biochemical stimuli. Nothing more. Good for you. Right now you have nothing but a speculation. You may be right, though I doubt it. Go for it. Prove your case.

Yes, they mean that the authors took pains to control their experiment for every variable that might affect health and lifespan, two of the phenotypic characteristics they were interested in in those studies.This doesn't require the genome to 'know' anything about the environment. Things about an organism's lifestyle are normally experienced directly by the organism, i.e. day night cycles and sleeping patterns, diet and exercise regime. The neural system is not required to mediate this information in many cases although it does in some.You are adding another unneccessary layer of complexity. Organisms interact with their environment, that is how information from the environment is imparted to the genome, through differential success of genetic variants in a specific environment.There are published models for how information about the environment can be incroporated through natural selection (Frank, 2009).TTFN,WK

As i see it the authors believed that variation in life style would affect phenotypic characteristics, through affecting epigenetic areas of genome. Is it any different from what i am sayng ? Surely it "does not reqire ....."environment". It is just how nature works, according to epigenetics and my theory.
'Normal direct experience': exactly it is what i am saying.
'Neural system: how else life style could affect epigenome? It is necessary to my theory, as i don't think natural selection is the only way of information transfer from environment to genome.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.

---

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

Not only. Tthey prove also that the authors believe that life style (obviously by neural system- how else it coulld be done?) can affect epigenome areas. It is simple as that.Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.

---

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

Sorry Zi Ko, I've already pointed out to you why this is wrong, either you really can't understand plain english or you are just lying at this point.The papers they referred to were not looking at the epigenome, they were looking at health and longevity. The quotes you gave were from the introduction talking about the work of others, not the epigeentic factors studied in that paper.TTFN,WK

You've already stated that you are only speculating in the other thread.Time to end things, I think.Edited by Larni, : Spellink

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.