Why would a mainstream journal designed to deliver science to the masses willingly side with a fascist distortion of that science? The latest research to come out of Israel would suggest the answer ‘Because they want to!” This is a straightforward response – but is it ‘science’ in the conventional sense? The above linked (below referenced) article is a clear example of scientists in the service of a religious State – Israel – attempting to misinterpret objective data to justify their (inverted) spiritually premised, racist ideas. If humans can just ‘will’ evolutional change on a subjective level – then this opens the door for a torrent of theological nonsense which has no bearing on material reality! Once again, religious (inverted) theological thinking is placed ABOVE that of rational science and humanity is regressed to that of the Medieval era! These Israeli ‘researchers’ are suggesting that all oppressed peoples only have themselves to blame because they are quite literally ‘pulling’ (through an ‘act of will’) material circumstance into a certain orientation around them – and only have themselves to blame for all the injustices they suffer! A slave is a ‘slave’ not because of the imperialist attitudes of the ‘enslaving’ group that controls his destiny – but rather because he has structured the world that way around himself and has cajoled the oppressing group into unwittingly co-operating with his inherently self-defeating plan. In other, this Israeli ‘research’ implies that the slave is the architect of his own suffering and has no right to seriously blame an external agency. A person suffering from Disabilities, or a person who is not male, heterosexual or ‘White’, etc, is performing (according to this Israeli ‘research’) exactly the same deceptive sleight of hand – and falsely blaming their oppressors, for the oppression they experience! A Palestinian child, for instance, is ‘forcing’ and Israeli soldier to load his gun, aim his gun (at a child) – and pull the trigger! According to this Israeli ‘research’ – it is the dead Palestinian child that is responsible for this entire chain of events and the perpetuator of this violence is entirely absolved! Such an attitude (masquerading as ‘science’) would imply that the Palestinians are the cause of their own misery and that the Israelis who kill, rape and maim them are the ‘victims’ of this Palestinian inner corruption! Of course, this type of Zionist misrepresentation of material science also attempts to undermine the material science of Socialist Science as conceived by Marx and Engels – which interprets ALL religious ideology as an ‘inversion’ of reality and which condemns ‘Zionism’ as a Jewish form of White Supremacist ideology (supporting the view of the civilised world as expressed through the UN)! More to the point, why is a science magazine printing this pseudo-science and taking it seriously? This is what fascism does, it slowly seeps into the mainstream and infects all with its racism and distorted view of reality. What the Zionists routinely do with archaeology, they are now doing with biology – that is subordinating material science to the level of their defunct theology so that the latter is made to appear the servant of the former! No wonder the UN declared Zionism a form of racism and White Supremacy in 1975! Listening to this nonsense is like taking the ramblings of Nazi German scientists from 1930s Germany seriously! As I suspect this ‘research’ will be quietly ‘withdrawn’ and ‘obliterated’ from the public record due to its anti-intellectual premise – I am reproducing its content in its entirety. Like all forms of fascism, Israeli Zionism does not care about discovering or defining the truth – it only cares about influencing and distorting public opinion. This laughable piece of pseudo-science is intended to justify a religious state of mind as the only filter through which humanity should be interpreted and perceived, a filter which privileges White Jews whilst subjugating and demonising all other groups (including non-White Jews)!
Study uncovers first evidence of long-term directionality in origination of human mutation, challenging neo-Darwinism
A new study by a team of researchers from Israel and Ghana has brought the first evidence of nonrandom mutation in human genes, challenging a core assumption at the heart of evolutionary theory by showing a long-term directional mutational response to environmental pressure. Using a novel method, researchers led by Professor Adi Livnat from the University of Haifa showed that the rate of generation of the HbS mutation, which protects against malaria, is higher in people from Africa, where malaria is endemic, than in people from Europe, where it is not.
“For over a century, the leading theory of evolution has been based on random mutations. The results show that the HbS mutation is not generated at random but instead originates preferentially in the gene and in the population where it is of adaptive significance,” said Prof. Livnat. Unlike other findings on mutation origination, this mutation-specific response to a specific environmental pressure cannot be explained by traditional theories. “We hypothesize that evolution is influenced by two sources of information: External information that is natural selection, and internal information that is accumulated in the genome through the generations and impacts the origination of mutations,” said Livnat.
Ever since Darwin we have known that life arose by evolution. But how, exactly, does evolution—in all its grandeur, mystery and complexity—happen? For the past century scientists have assumed that mutations occur by accident to the genome and that natural selection, or the survival of the fittest, favors beneficial accidents. The accumulation of these presumed genetic accidents under natural selection over the millennia leads in turn to adaptations, from the hawk’s sharp eye to the human cardiovascular system.
While widely held in the scientific community, this view has always left open fundamental questions, such as the problem of complexity. Can the sequential accumulation of small random changes, each beneficial on its own, lead within the timespan available to the evolution of such astonishingly complex and impressive adaptations as we see around us in nature, such as eyes, brains or wings, where complementary parts interweave into a complex whole? However, the only alternative at the fundamental level conceived of up until now consisted of variants of Lamarckism—the idea that organisms can somehow respond directly to their immediate environments with beneficial genetic change. Since Lamarckism has not worked in general, the notion of random mutation remained the prevailing view.
In order to distinguish between the random mutation and natural selection explanation and the possibility that nonrandom mutation is important, Prof. Livnat and his lab manager, Dr. Daniel Melamed, developed a new method for detecting de novo mutations—mutations that arise “out of the blue” in offspring without being inherited from either parent. In breaking a new accuracy record, their method allowed something not previously possible—counting of de novo mutations for particular points of interest in the genome.
They then applied their method to examine the de novo emergence of the human hemoglobin S (HbS) mutation, perhaps the most well known point mutation in biology and evolution. HbS provides protection against malaria for people with one copy but causes sickle-cell anemia in those with two. Malaria itself, a vector-borne blood disease, has arguably been the strongest selection pressure acting on humans in the last 10,000 years, often causing more than a million deaths per year in Africa in the recent past. HbS is also used as a central example of random mutation and natural selection in evolution: It has been long assumed to have arisen accidentally in an individual in sub-Saharan Africa and then spread inside Africa via natural selection until its malaria-protective benefits were balanced out by its sickle-cell anemia costs.
By examining the de novo origination of HbS, Livnat was able to disentangle for the first time whether the malaria-protective mutation arises randomly and spread in Africa only because of selection pressure or instead whether it could actually be originating de novo more frequently in sub-Saharan Africans—a group that has been subject to intense malarial selection pressure for many generations. If the mutation is random, then it should be equally likely to emerge in both geographical groups. However, if mutation is nonrandom, then perhaps it would actually emerge more frequently in Africans.
“There are at least two possible reasons why such a question had not been asked before,” explains Prof. Livnat. “First, it had been assumed that mutation is random. Second, even if one had wanted to ask such a question, it would not have been possible with previous methods.”
Contrary to the widely accepted expectations, the results supported the nonrandom pattern. The HbS mutation originated de novo not only much faster than expected from random mutation, but also much faster in the population (in sub-Saharan Africans as opposed to Europeans) and in the gene (in the beta-globin as opposed to the control delta-globin gene) where it is of adaptive significance. These results upend the traditional example of random mutation and natural selection, turning it into an example of a nonrandom yet non-Lamarckian mutation.
“Mutations defy traditional thinking. The results suggest that complex information that is accumulated in the genome through the generations impacts mutation, and therefore mutation-specific origination rates can respond in the long-term to specific environmental pressures,” said Prof. Livnat. Previous studies, motivated by Lamarckism, only tested for an immediate mutational response to environmental pressures. “Mutations may be generated nonrandomly in evolution after all, but not in the way previously conceived. We must study the internal information and how it affects mutation, as it opens the door to evolution being a far bigger process than previously conceived,” Livnat concluded.
Until now, investigators have been limited by technology to measuring mutation rates as averages across many positions in the genome. Overcoming this barrier, the new method developed by Livnat and Melamed allowed the HbS mutation to be the first to have its mutation-specific origination rate measured, opening up new vistas for studies on mutation origination. These studies have the potential to affect not only our fundamental understanding of evolution, but also our understanding of diseases that are caused by mutations, namely genetic disease and cancer.