I'm an independent scientist producing science criticism in terms the public can understand. Significant criticism is not allowed within science. Science critics used to be retired scientists, usually focusing on physics where science errors are most extreme. The internet put an end to seriously developed criticism by only allowing official web sites to be visible.
What are my qualifications? There are underlying qualifications in the subjects that I take up. I don't repeat what others have covered. I break new ground. Then I make sure the evidence is there and unquestionable. Perhaps most importantly, there is a lot of material, in science and out, which requires a lot of experience beyond academics. Most scientists are too restricted and busy to go beyond academics. I cover endless amounts of such material which other scientists have never given the slightest thought to. Here are more details on my qualifications.
I got a masters degree in microbiology in 1970 but not a Ph.D. degree. My graduate research was on the physiology of an unusual yeast, Nadsonia fulvescens.
The yeast results explained the basic physiology of mushrooms, so I did independent mushroom research on a farm in South Dakota while living on social security disability due to mental pain. Mental pain is caused by memories of pain too close to the surface and contacted by distracting environments. It drove me out of graduate school, as complex social environments are bad for mental pain.
I did mushroom research on the morel and found that it evolved from a single celled yeast during this ice age cycle, which means the morel is less than 50 thousand years of evolutionary age. I know of no other multicellular organism that evolved from a single celled organism within the past 200 million years. My results show dramatic evolution through a reversion anomaly and phenotypic variation. I wasn't allowed to publish my mushroom results, being an outsider and showing results which contradict errors of scientists within the power structures.
Being independent and having the freedom to look into problems creates a totally different universe of science. Employed scientists are so restricted that they can't study the problems which they encounter. As a result, the entire field of science accumulates errors which never get corrected.
Another problem with structured science is that scientists are too busy to develop knowledge. Going through procedures is not the same thing as producing knowledge. Knowledge is something that each person must produce in his own head through a lot of concerted effort, because it is abstract. Persons who are very busy stop developing knowledge. Knowledge builds upon knowledge. The more a person acquires, the easier it is to acquire. And it is all interrelated. At some point, errors in physics are quite related to errors in biology, and it all overlaps with technology.
When I was in graduate school during the sixties, about ten percent of the scientists were producing real science. The rest were producing nonsense, errors or outright corruption. Ten percent was enough in the biological area to move science forward. The bad science was falling to the wayside and being ignored. But over time, real scientists were shoved aside in most areas as incompetents pushed their way in. Physics was overrun by corruption in 1845 with Joule's fake experiment due to the abstract nature of physics.
In 1983 I stumbled onto the misdefinition of energy in physics. It means the equation for representing kinetic energy is wrong. It has velocity squared within it (KE=½mv²), while nothing can move at velocity squared. I developed a simple and unquestionable mathematical proof of the error and conducted physics experiments on the subject. About ninety percent of physics is corrupted by the error. Everything else in physics besides Newton's laws is corrupted by the resulting shift in standards for contriving instead of measuring.
Physicists have been redefining science to remove it from the rationality that proves them wrong and converting it into religion, where the test of truth is power and status. Worship replaces measurements, because there is no criticism where there is worship.
What cheerleaders for science corruption don't understand is objective reality. They live in a subjective realm, where ad hominem attacks make up their arguments. Real criticism is independent of who says so, because objective reality is the only relevance. The bottom dwellers assume a critic must be above the persons being criticized. It's the other way around; criticism is infinitely easier than deriving reality, which means critics need no qualifications. In fact, most criticism is about the standards rather than the results.
Mushroom research involves a lot of rudimentary technology and engineering, which I expanded into electronics. I made important discoveries in electronics designing current amplifiers for improving outputs of signal handling amplifiers. I also discovered a new method of measuring capacitance which is 100 thousand times more precise than other methods for absolute value measurements and ten million times more sensitive for the relative measurements needed in touch screen displays and accelerometers. I couldn't do anything with the results, but engineers used the designs for touch screens and accelerometers. You would be using a stylus with a cellphone otherwise. Engineers do not have the freedom to invent such things, which held up accelerometers until they stumbled onto my results through the engineering of cellphones.
The yeast that I studied was very mysterious, as it formed a spore outside the vegetative cell, and cell material migrated into the spore leaving an empty shell for the rest. Yeast scientists knew something was triggering sporulation by yeasts, but they couldn't determine what it was. A. F. Croes, in the Netherlands, looked at the physiology and found indications that a peak in energy metabolism was triggering sporulation. I found additional evidence in nitrogen metabolism. Depletion of nitrogen causes a build-up of ATP, because it can't be used for synthesis without nitrogen, and the energy peak promotes sporulation.
Both the yeast that I studied (Nadsonia fulvescens) and the mushroom (the morel) are examples of extreme evolution. My work therefore moved in the direction of evolution biology.
It is now apparent that an energy peak is the basic trigger mechanism for spore formation used by all fungi and yeasts, and it explains how mushrooms form. Mushrooms show the need for an energy peak to promote formation of the above-ground structure. An energy peak is a method of determining that nutrients and cell machinery are adequate for completing the process. This physiology is visible in the composting method of growing mushrooms. After mycelium gets thick, a layer of peat moss is put on top, which is called a casing. When mycelium gets to the surface of the casing, a mushroom forms. The difference between surface and lower growth is oxygen availability. Oxygen produces ATP through respiration.
But a second mechanism is also required for mushroom formation, and it too is found in the yeast, Nadsonia fulvescens. It is the production of spores without nutrients available, called endotrophism. Endo means "within the cells," and trophism means nutrition. It is nutrition from within.
This yeast stores up energy and cell material and then transfers that material into an adjacent chamber where the spore forms. Sporulation is inhibited by a repressor substance, acetate, which is a product of metabolism. These strange characteristics result from adaptation to growing on tree sap. Most yeasts grow well on tree sap, but they can't adapt to it, because it is transitory. Nadsonia adapted by forming a spore when rain washes the tree exudate away. It maximizes growth by not allowing spores to form while nutrients are available. Forming the spore from previously stored-up material results in a shrinkage of cell mass. Since yeasts have hard cell walls, the material must move into a smaller chamber to accommodate the reduction in size. Only Nadsonia shows the migration of cell material, which indicates that it is the only yeast which forms a spore when nutrients are not available and therefore the only yeast adapted to growing on tree sap.
Mushrooms which grow in the ground (but not wood growing mushrooms) are usually endotrophic. They build up a mass of mycelium for several months and then channel the cell material into a mushroom in one or two days. The high speed process of forming a mushroom is necessary to prevent drying of tissue or damage before spores are released. Modern mushrooms including the morel do not tolerate drying, so they have to form spores rapidly. Two ancient mushrooms, the puffball and the bolete, are resistant to drying, and they form quite slowly.
The Morel Mushroom
When I began studying the morel mushroom, it was extremely mysterious, as it produced spores within the tissue (ascospores), as yeasts do. As time went on, I found the physiology of the morel to be exactly that of a yeast, which could only result from evolution from a yeast. The morel was excreting acid to kill bacteria and feed on them. The acid tends to accumulate on the mycelium and kill it. But yeasts will tolerate more acid than bacteria, so the morel became dependent upon excreting acid, even while too much will kill the mycelium.
The morel evolved from a yeast so recently that it does not have good control over morphology and has not yet evolved detection of gravity for vertical growth, as almost everything which emerges from the soil has. It also self-destructs as it dies off, as all bacteria and yeasts do, but which mushrooms never do. The process is called autolysis. It allows nutrients to be recycled by breaking large molecules into subunits for re-use as nutrients.
These extreme characteristics of the morel mushroom could only result from recent evolution from a yeast. Morel mushroom scientists at the universities claim the morel evolved 129 million years ago. They ridicule my work with authority in place of real science. This state of science is pervasive and required serious criticism of corruption in science. There isn't a counter-argument to these points. Corrupt authority is an isolation barrier around reality, not an alternative reality.
Growing Mushrooms On Glucose
Growing mushrooms on glucose would allow all of the valuable mushrooms to be sold in the stores. The most important normal mushroom is Boletus edulis (often called porcini) because it has a designed-in flavor for attracting animals which eat the spores and carry them around. Truffles, even more so, as they also attract animals while staying under the ground. Truffles cost $3-5 thousand dollars per pound.
So I did some work on growing mushrooms on glucose. The main problem is getting high density mycelium, as soluble nutrients become toxic at low concentration. High density mycelium is needed for two reasons. One, the mycelium won't differentiate (form a mushroom) until the mycelium is high density. And two, commercial growing cannot waste a lot of space and materials with mushrooms which are scattered far apart.
I developed a procedure for growing high density mycelium in a three dimensional structure using nutrients which are ten times more concentrated than the toxic level. With the morel which I was studying, accumulation of acid would stop growth, since the morel is physiologically still like a yeast. I couldn't work with Boletus edulis, since it doesn't grow in the area where I was working in South Dakota. I couldn't get funding being outside the power structures, so I couldn't carry the work farther.
In 1983, after finding that energy was misdefined in physics and arguing with physicists and getting nowhere, I developed a mathematical proof of the error, which of course got nowhere also. The mathematical proof is quite rudimentary, as any high school kid who has studied physics and calculus could verify the proof. Yet physicists will not touch the subject, as such a degree of criticism is not allowed in physics. In physics, errors are too big to be corrected.
I got into electronics designing numerous temperature controlling and measuring devices for mushroom research. In constructing an audio amplifier, I found that the usual design had an extremely problematic output due to an inadvertent voltage gain of about 50,000. So I designed a method of driving speakers without voltage gain, which greatly improved audio amplifiers. Of course, no one but a few hobbyists were interested.
Capacitance meters were extremely expensive and imprecise during the eighties, so I found a better way to measure capacitance. The usual way was too slow for measuring small capacitors. Meters measure the time interval required for voltage to rise, which means two measurements. A much faster way is to simply measure the current required to produce the voltage rise. Being much faster, the process can be completed during the short time interval that small capacitors do what they do. This method allows almost a millionth as much capacitance to be measured as the previous method. It would have helped engineers develop touch screen displays based on capacitance, as I was getting email from engineering students at the time, but no one directly said so.
By 1997, I had a large amount of scientific information accumulated and no better place for it than the internet. About then, global warming became a social issue, so I have been developing that subject explaining the science in terms the public can understand.
I'm a pre-1980 type liberal. At that time, liberals were promoting equal opportunity, which means creating infrastructure and solving problems for the lower classes. When the lower classes have money to spend, economies thrive. The IMF does the oppositeputting the lower classes out of work and bankrupting economies.