Bruce Lipton - Biology of Perception 6 of 7

mutation of bacteries has no relation with human (or big animals)
same thing for viruses

bacteries are reproducing by replication
the mutation occurs juste because among the huge number of replicants some of them were not very well replicated by accident
and for smoe reason were more adapted to a stressing environment
then this new mutant became the new bacteria
(for example resisting to antibiotics)

animals (we are) do not mutate
they reproduce sexualy

absolutly fascianting...

The answer on your question is very easy: if humans yield to bring forth only what is good for oneself and for his fellow person he or she will perpetuate his preceptions in that direction more and more (self experienced). When he or she testifiesof this the more others will do the same too and a more and more less environment will come to pass! The question is will you be the first to die to yourself and start changing your attitude to the good only?

Still a big fan of other theories but I had to say something even in this small way because that is a myth of autism. No doubt children starved of love can and will exhibit autistic like qualities but I am convinced that most of us have autistic like qualities on varying levels.

I am thrilled and excited about discovering Dr. Lipton's theories. I unfortunately was shocked at his example of autistic children being who they are because of a lack of love. I work with families with autistic children and this is not the case. I feel it was irresponsible to make that leap. My understanding that many cases of autism are more of the result that there perception of the sensory world is too overwhelming that they shut down and can't respond. Not because of lack of love.

FROM: Test Tube Evolution Catches Time in a Bottle

"By chopping up the bacteria's DNA with enzymes and applying probes that home in on known sequences, they found that after thousands of generations, the populations' genomes were riddled with changes. The changes were different in each population and had accumulated at very different rates, the group reported in the March Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, even though the fitness increases were similar."
A moron AND a LIAR!

MORE FROM: Test Tube Evolution Catches Time in a Bottle.
When it comes to organisms' adaptive performance, says Lenski, "evolution is remarkably reproducible. But as you move away from performance, to cell size or genes, things are less and less reproducible." Because all 12 populations started out genetically identical and have experienced the same selective pressures, the differences underscore the role of chance in setting evolution's course.

samples of the 12 E. coli populations had been growing in glucose for 2000 generations and all 12 had improved their ability to grow on glucose by about the same amount. But when they were put in a different sugar, maltose, some populations thrived while others languished. For each population adapting to limited glucose, says Travisano, "it seems likely that glucose uptake was tweaked in subtly different ways. And those subtly different tweaks had big effects in a different environment."

All 12 lines were cultured for another 1000 generations on maltose, and all 12 evolved to grow well on maltose. But the fitness was not consistent as it had been on glucose, where the starting genotype had been identical. Evolution wasn't as reproducible as before, because of chance variations in how the populations had adapted earlier. "Once we had diversity, we could prune it back tremendously with adaptation. But not completely. Once you are different, that difference tends to persist,"

Even if the general outline of such experiments is predictable, in many cases the genetic pathway they take depends on chance. That seems to be the case for Rainey's wrinkly spreader strains, too. When his group took 24 wrinkly spreader strains that had evolved independently and then forced them to evolve back into a smooth form by shaking their vials to keep the culture medium from becoming stratified, "some go back easily; some sort of struggle," implying differences in their genetic makeup.