AC suspects, and I tend to concur, that the mainstream evolutionary perspective in biology is a smokescreen intended to obscure certain facts about human origins:
Most “authority bioscience people” are midwits the conspiracy has elevated artificially to fill the role of the natural geniuses who domestic surveillance’s school units are designed to suppress. I would not assume any of them understand anything. and they just repeat what they see written somewhere.
Obviously they are promoting easily debunkable clear falsities, while asserting it is fact, and telling everyone you have to believe they are the final word. Vox is one of the mathematically gifted who sees it is bullshit and is calling it out – which is a great service. I am degreed in Biochemistry/Molecular Biology, and I never heard this argument until Vox made it.
But people who really understand the science end up not only understanding how things work, they also understand we do not know about everything. Look at history, and theories pop up, some are wrong and get knocked down, others can be right and get knocked down, others can then come back after being debunked and turn out to be right after all, and it is all a result of the myriad of stresses we are designed to confront leading to us having umpteen backup and regulatory pathways, some almost never activated, others operating unnoticed behind far more massive pathways, and do forth.
I would not get my panties in a bunch over this argument because I have always assumed there would be other mechanisms to guide evolution, which we just do not know. Aspects of the way different atoms interact, or move, or are affected by outside variables which alter the rates of random mutations until they are not random, and those atoms tend to do things in the cytoplasm which tend to produce those structures, which work that way. There are probably mechanisms which detect high amounts of mRNA, conclude that the body needs a lot of that gene product because it is calling for large amounts of its template, and so they burn additional copies of the RNA sequence back into the DNA so more can be transxribed per time period.
When they introduced the vax, there was no way for the Spike mRNA to be retro-transcribed into the DNA. Then they found people still producing Spike years later, and it was clearly not the mRNA they were injected with.
Any biologist who attacks Vox here, I just assume is clueless, because anybody intelligent in the field knows we don’t know anywhere near everything about the mechanisms involved. To me Vox’s argument should be acknowledged and serve as an impetus to investigate why there is this disparity. It doubtless points to a Nobel-prize worthy discovery and a revolution in the understanding.
It is probably just a result of all the authorities in the nation being theater-kids from the domestic surveillance, pretending to be experts, but their side is so retarded here I almost wonder if something is being hidden there, and they are really trying to hide something else which they do not want us to know, maybe about our origins.
As it happens, I assumed that alternative evolutionary mechanisms would be one way to account for the obvious inability of the existing mechanisms to account for all of the genetic divergences observed between every pair of diverged species. Because it’s not just a chimp-human divergence that needs to be correctly accounted for, but all the other divergences from macacque to bonobo and siamang to Bornean orangutan. The mainstream models fall catastrophically short in every single case.
And I even found a new evolutionary mechanism through examining and correcting the boundaries of Kimura’s time equation. In humans, at least, relictation accounts for about half the total base pairs that natural selection does, although between them they don’t account for eight percent of the total divergence. So, I don’t think there are likely any more to discover, and even if we do, I don’t think they will account for the tens of millions of divergent base pairs.
What I find more than a little amusing is that, unlike Charles Darwin, I have managed to identify, prove, and quantify an actual evolutionary mechanism. And yet, somehow, the evolutionists still fail to celebrate and revere me.
I don’t know what the secret beneath the smokescreen is. Perhaps it’s Intelligent Genetic Manipulation. Perhaps it’s something else entirely. But I’m reasonably confident that there is something obscured by the modern evolutionary paradigm that not only contradicts, but completely overturns, our current understanding of biological history. I think that’s something that scientists should be excited about, but apparently most of them would rather keep themselves occupied with the scientific equivalent of coloring books, just using their crayons to fill in the blanks of the existing paradigm.