Wave genetics has unlocked all aspects of DNA functionality, even those once considered “junk”. This powerful and exciting technology has numerous applications such as in vivo organ regeneration without costly and risky surgery procedures.
Unfortunately, however, this research has been attacked and suppressed by an influential faction within the Russian Academy of Science. Why has this happened?
Pseudo-science
Many are attracted to pseudoscience despite its easy debunking; this is likely because pseudoscience taps into people’s gut feelings, offering answers that seem scientific. On the other hand, scientists rely on evidence and reason when making statements; unfortunately this can sometimes be misinterpreted and used to support political decisions that people disagree with, leading to distrust between scientists and the public – eventually leading to pseudoscience becoming widespread as a response.
There is no clear line dividing real from fake science; however, one can discern between it and pseudoscience by looking at how scientists use new ideas. If an innovative thought generates interest among working scientists and is integrated into research programs or publications or new lines of inquiry then it likely fits within science. Furthermore, its pragmatic usefulness should also be assessed against existing hypotheses, theories, models, paradigms or paradigms before passing judgment on such ideas as scientific.
Misleading pseudoscience can be difficult to spot, as it often appears in places that appear similar to science, such as popular psychology and religion. Furthermore, its appeal makes it easy to be taken in by its claims; unfortunately many don’t take the time to study science at school so their intuition often guides their beliefs when choosing what to believe.
Demystifying pseudoscience requires understanding why people are drawn to it. Some reasons could include an appealing mix of black-and-white solutions, the difficulty of science studies and conspiracy theories as well as people’s fascination with UFOlogy or ancient aliens over biology or chemistry studies. But perhaps the biggest reason of all is likely entertainment value of pseudoscience over real one; people prefer stories involving UFOlogy over biology or chemistry studies for instance.
Excessive claims
Wave genetics studies often exaggerate its power. Such claims include those regarding error catastrophe – in which mutation accumulation leads to fitness decline – or exponential mutational increases. Unfortunately, neither one of these claims have ever been successfully demonstrated experimentally and no examples of error catastrophe have ever been seen in nature.
Marine heatwaves have long been thought to cause significant declines in genetic diversity within seaweed forests, with expected heterozygosity and mean likelihood of homozygosity both declining at Marmion while inbreeding increased at Geraldton as inbreeding increased there – however diversity metrics elsewhere within the heatwave footprint remained relatively stable, such as Jurien Bay and Hamelin which experienced decreased coverage during the heatwave but experienced growth afterwards.
A bivariate Cholesky model that only includes additive genetic and unshared environmental covariation components of covariation best fits the data, showing that most cross-wave correlation is attributable to longitudinal heritability while only minor proportions of variance is shared between waves by common environmental factors.
Suppression of scientific research
People living in societies that support free speech should have the freedom to conduct and share any research that interests them, yet researchers often face restrictions from exploring important questions due to potential public outrage or conflict with existing ideologies. Such censorship erodes credibility of science while diminishing our knowledge about our world – this makes government or industry attempts at controlling scientific research all the more dangerous.
Recently, for example, it was reported on Facebook, Reddit and other sites that US President Trump asked scientists to submit their research for approval prior to sharing them with his administration (archived). Snopes could find no evidence for such a request, although many readers sent emails inquireing about this claim.
Early career researchers can be especially vulnerable to funding restrictions. Although publishing their work is essential for career advancement, early career researchers may be asked not to publish results that don’t conform with what’s favored by their sponsors if that publication could tarnish their corporate sponsors’ interests – for example a researcher was told she couldn’t publish results that found generic thyroid drugs were as effective as brand versions even after her funder threatened legal action against both herself and her university.
Science research is an invaluable public good, and should be freely accessible to everyone. Unfortunately, however, this isn’t always the case in practice, making it important for universities and researchers to defend their work against attacks it might face – one way is ensuring its quality by using all standard tests before publishing anything.
History shows us that major nations have suppressed scientific research for ideological purposes, which has severely limited modern science’s development, leaving us without enough knowledge about our environment and ourselves. Therefore, it’s critical that we support and protect scientists who risk their lives to speak out on scientific integrity; including standing up for those subject to abuse or intimidation.
Misrepresentation
Empirical and spiritual teachers have known for years that our DNA can be programmed with words, thoughts and vibrations; now science has proven this. Frequencies associated with thoughts can influence DNA sequences of organisms; but in order for this method to work it must have the appropriate vibration frequency to activate health-promoting genes while decreasing disease-causing ones.
Rosie Redfield may be famous as an expert at disproving arsenic life claims, but wave genetics is more difficult to disprove. A strong grasp of quantum mechanics will be required in order to disprove claims that wave genetics is founded upon similar concepts as quantum gravity or quantum entanglement.
Ford Doolittle and others made headlines with their research disproving arsenic-based life in Mono Lake. Although this data may have been interesting, its findings were misrepresented and hyped up by uncritical media outlets; thus exposing not the actual data itself, but how it was presented and sold to the public.
As part of any comprehensive effort to understand and communicate scientific discoveries effectively, gender and sexuality perspectives must be included in genomics research. Failing to do so would waste resources supporting restrictive policies or social norms and prevent scientific communities from reaching their full potential. A recent study by Jean Brechman and colleagues revealed how scientific knowledge may become altered as it travels from its source into press releases or news articles for interpretation by reporters – often leading to serious misrepresentations of its original source research.
