Creationism News -- May 2012 ????? -- 2012?5? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT – Creationism News -- May 2012 ????? -- 2012?5? PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 704be9-MDgzY


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation

Creationism News -- May 2012 ????? -- 2012?5?


PowerPoint Presentation – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:178
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 189
Provided by: Christ692


Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Creationism News -- May 2012 ????? -- 2012?5?

Creationism News -- May 2012 ????? -- 2012?5?
  • Dedicated to David Coppedge who sacrificed his
    career as the Head Systems Administrator for the
    Cassini Spacecraft in JPL to honor the Creator
    of the Universe. He also spent literally
    thousands of hours to make his excellent
  • The contents of this presentation were taken from
    various sources. Thank God that David Coppedge
    came back from the lawsuit after two months of
    vacation. Pray for the results of the lawsuit.
    I now resume using his website materials.
  • Pastor Chui
  • http//

Creatures of Light ???
  • Discover (May 2012) announces that in the
    American Museum of Natural History in New York
    City many exhibits on creatures of light New
    Zealand cave where gnat larvae string glowing
    lines to ensnare the insects they eat the
    underwater world of a jellyfish that absorbs blue
    light and radiates flashes of green. Live
    light-emitting creatures include a tank of
    flashlight fish, who lure the shrimp and plankton
    they eat with a blue-green glow, produced by
    bacteria living in translucent sacks under their

Learning from the Octopus ??????
  • Discover (May 2012) reports that Rafe Sagarin
    observed that top-down management and
    bureaucratic inertia stymied government efforts
    to adapt to constantly evolving security threats.
    He promotes an alternative strategy he calls
    natural security the idea that we can model
    our own strategies on the survival techniques of
    highly successful organisms. Its a humbling
    thought, but Homeland Security may have a lot to
    gain from studying octopuses, whose skin cells
    can adapt to threats without reporting to or
    taking orders from a central brain.

The Taste of Tomorrow ?????
  • Discover (May 2012) reports that Josh Schonwald
    first heard of cobia, a steaklike fish that some
    seafood industry say will soon become a culinary
    staple. As his investigations progress, Schonwald
    realizes that any vision of the future food must
    balance ethical and environmental concerns with
    culinary ones. While he optimistically champions
    biotechs potential to make the future more
    sustainable, most of the possibilities that he
    exploressuch as lab-grown meat, a food pill, and
    saltwater fish raised indoorsare still a long
    way from reaching our plates.

Grand Prismatic Spring, Yellowstone ?????,??????
  • Discover (May 2012) reports the Yellowstone
    National Park powers the 10,000 springs, geysers,
    and other thermal features located where
    magma-heated water and steam come simmering to
    the surface. Yellowstones biggest hot spring,
    Grand Prismatic, also hosts some of the planets
    strangest, hardiest life, which thrives at
    temperatures up to 180 degrees F. Water flows
    from the ground at 560 gallons per minute.
    Brilliant green, yellow, brown, and orange
    bacterial mates encircle the spring. Some
    bacteria use arsenic instead of phosphorus in
    their DNA! This is still controversial.

Transit of Venus over the Sun (June 5) ????????
  • Discover (May 2012) reports on June 5, 2012,
    Venus will pass over the sun. This can be seen
    all over US on a cloudless day. Use a sheet of
    welders glass or project an image with a
    telescope. The next chance wont come until 2117!
    You will see a black dot which will move over the
    solar disk. The observations can be used to
    calculate the distance between us and our star.
    That was how the astronomer Edmond Halley did it
    in 1716.

Human Organ for Transplant ?????????
  • Discover (May 2012) has an interesting article on
    organ transplant. In 2011, doctors in the US
    transplanted some 21,000 organs from deceased
    donors, obtained through 58 organ procurement
    organizations. Heart donations must be
    transplanted within 4 to 6 hours livers have 24
    hours kidneys can last 2 days before expiration.
    Kidneys are the most common organ transplanted.
    In 2011 more than 15,000 people received kidney
    transplants 10,000 came from deceased donors.
    Liver, heart, lung, pancreas, and intestine come
    next, in that order. Acceptable organ donors
    range from newborn to over 65. Seniors can donate
    corneas, skin, and bone. 113,000 people are still
    waiting. 18 people die waiting for an organ each

Things you didnt know about allergies ?????????
  • Discover (May 2012) has an interesting article on
    allergies. According to NIH, more than 50 of
    Americans have allergies. Most food allergies
    result from an immune response to a protein.
    Parasites can distract the immune system from
    food allergies. Allergies to shellfish, nuts,
    fish, milk, eggs, and other foods cause an
    estimated 150 to 200 deaths a year in the US. A
    walk in the grass can turn you into a vegan. Tick
    bites can cause the immune system to produce
    antibodies to alpha-gal, a carbohydrate in beef,
    pork, and lamb. These antibodies can induce
    allergic reactions to meat. Human dander can
    cause allergic rashes in dogs and cats, and in
    other humans. Jewelry containing nickel can
    trigger a lifelong metal allergy.

Planetary Radiometric Dates 1/3 Younger
  • http// reports
  • The half-lives of radioactive isotopes may not be
    as well-known as thought.  One decay rate
    frequently used to date solar system objects had
    to be adjusted down to 66 of its former assumed
    value, impacting theories of planet formation.
  • PhysOrg headlined, Faster-Ticking Clock
    Indicates Early Solar System May Have Evolved
    Faster Than We Think.  The old decay rate for
    samarium-146 (146Sm) was re-evaluated by a team
    from Argonne National Laboratory, Hebrew
    University, two Japanese universities and the
    University of Notre Dame.  The old value of 103
    million years for its half-life was recalculated
    at 68 million years, two-thirds of its previously
    measured value.

Planetary Radiometric Dates 1/3 Younger
  • http// reports
  • The smaller value, previously adopted as 103
    million years, to a much shorter value of 68
    million years, the article continued.  It has
    the effect of shrinking the assessed chronology
    of events in the early solar system and in
    planetary differentiation into a shorter time
    span, the article said.  The story was reported
    a month ago by Science Daily.

Planetary Radiometric Dates 1/3 Younger
  • http// reports
  • The article put a positive spin on this
    adjustment, saying, The new time scale,
    interestingly, is now consistent with
    a recent and precise dating made on a lunar rock
    and is in better agreement with the dating
    obtained with other chronometers.  It seems they
    could just as well have said that the other
    chronometers are now cast into doubt by the
    adjustment of 146Sm, which was also considered a
    precise chronometer till now.

Planetary Radiometric Dates 1/3 Younger
  • http// reports
  • In any case, it is disturbing that a physical
    value that is out there in the world could be
    found to be so far off by human measurement.  How
    many published papers are affected by this
    change?  Papers often quote radiometric dates to
    4 or more significant figures.  Theorists rely on
    these values.  If values are not discovered but
    adopted, is it possible there was motivation by
    theorists to adopt a different value to create
    consistency with other chronometers?  Does the
    new value make the assessed chronology of events
    in the early system more or less plausible? 
    What will be the ripple effect from here on for a
    chronometer that ticks 33 faster than previously
    thought?  Who will go back and correct theories
    based on the previous value?  These are questions
    the press releases never ask.

Earth Myths with a Sprinkling of Data ??????????
  • According to Live Science, Bill Hammond has been
    measuring uplift of the Sierra Nevada range since
    2000.  Currently they have measured about a
    millimeter or two of uplift a year for less than
    12 years.  Launching from that, the article
  • The amount might seem small, but the data
    indicate that long-term trends in crustal
    uplift suggest the modern Sierra could be formed
    in less than 3 million years, which is relatively
    quick when compared to estimates using some
    geological techniques.
  • This represents an extrapolation of five orders
    of magnitude (stretching 12 years of data to
    suggest what happened in 3 million years). 
    Nevertheless, they are convinced they have
    determined a young uplift for the California
    mountain range.  Despite the bold announcements,
    Hammond said, The Sierra Nevada uplift process
    is fairly unique on Earth and not well

Earth Myths with a Sprinkling of Data ??????????
  • Even more hubris was displayed in another
    article, Earth history and evolution,
    on PhysOrg.  The opening paragraph is the
    operative statement about mythology referred to
    in our title
  • In classical mythology, the cypress tree
    is associated with death, the underworld and
    eternity. Indeed, the family to which cypresses
    belong, is an ancient lineage of conifers, and a
    new study of their evolution affords a unique
    insight into a turbulent era in the Earths
  • This article claimed that genetic data between
    several genera of cypress thought to have evolved
    independently after a mythical supercontinent,
    Pangea, split apart, has revolutionized the
    field of biogeography and given us
    understanding of earth history.

Earth Myths with a Sprinkling of Data ??????????
  • The new study confirms that cypresses represent a
    very old plant family. Their origins can
    be traced back to Pangea, and the evolutionary
    divergence of the northern and southern
    subfamilies of cypresses actually reflects the
    break-up of Pangea about 153 million years ago.
  • This adds another couple of orders of magnitude
    to the extrapolations from data evaluated in the
    present.  The insight generated comes with some
    caveats, however.  Some groups have turned out
    to be surprisingly young in evolutionary terms,
    others much older than people had assumed.  It
    appears that using assumptions about a law of
    nature concerning evolutionary rates requires
    sacrificing laws of nature in other aspects of
    the story.

Earth Myths with a Sprinkling of Data ??????????
  • Lets take stock of what we know (or think we
    know) based on the data presented.  (1) The
    Sierras have risen 1 or 2 millimeters per year
    since 2000, give or take the uncertainties that
    always need to be factored into any measurement. 
    (2) Certain selected genes in certain selected
    species of cypress have a measurable percent
    difference, give or take the uncertainties that
    always need to be factored into any measurement.
  • Thats it.  The rest is interpretation.

Earth Myths with a Sprinkling of Data ??????????
  • Are you better off with modern mythology than the
    Greeks and Romans were?  The fighting gods of
    classical lore have been lumped into a new god
    named Evolution that performs whatever miracles
    are necessary to keep the myth going.  We are
    told new lineages were established.  By whom? 
    Evolution, the god of death, the underworld and
    eternity.  Evolution weaves tales of turbulent
    eras in earth history when he fought the Earth
    Giants, splitting continents and sending the
    spirits of Life Force on separate evolutionary
    trajectories.  We dont see Evolution, but
    through his oracles, we gain understanding.  We
    envision detailed pictures.  We achieve unique

We Became Human by Mistake ?????????
  • Live Science headlined in bold print, Did a
    Copying Mistake Build Mans Brain?  (We assume
    this includes womans brain, but this could
    arouse controversy, depending on whether the
    mistake is deemed a good or bad thing).  Not to
    be outdone, New Scientist titled their version in
    a less sexist way, One gene helped human brains
    become complex.
  • The provocative headline stems from new
    research from the Scripps Research Institute
    that identified a gene that appears to result
    from a gene duplication

We Became Human by Mistake ?????????
  • There are approximately 30 genes that
    were selectively duplicated in humans, study
    researcher Franck Polleux, of The Scripps
    Research Institute in La Jolla, Calif., said in a
    statement. These are some of our most recent
    genomic innovations.
  • An extra copy of a gene gives evolution something
    to work with Like modeling clay, this gene isnt
    essential like the original copy, so changes can
    be made to it without damaging the resulting
  • By selectively duplicated, Polleux was clearly
    referring to natural selection, not selection by
    an intelligent designer wanting to make humans
    smarter.  The gene, SRGAP2, appears to be
    involved in the efficient organization of the
    cerebral cortex.

We Became Human by Mistake ?????????
  • When the researchers added  the partially
    duplicated gene copy to the mouse genome (mice
    dont normally have it) it seemed to speed the
    migration of brain cells during development,
    which makes brain organization more efficient.
  • The mice, however, were not observed to start
    writing music or philosophy.
  • Somehow, using evolutionary dating assumptions,
    the Scripps team was able to surmise that this
    gene got duplicated not once, but twice in human
    evolution the first time 3.5 million years ago,
    when it duplicated completely, and again 2.5
    million years ago, when only part of it got

We Became Human by Mistake ?????????
  • These cells that expressed the incomplete
    duplication of SRGAP2 also had more spines
     knoblike extensions on the cell surface that
    connect with other brain cells, which make them
    look more like human brain cells.
  • Interestingly, the incomplete copy of the gene
    seems to have showed up just as the extinct
    hominin Australopithecus made room for the
    genus Homo, which led to modern humans. Thats
    also when the brains of our ancestors began to
    expand and when dramatic changes in cognitive
    abilities are likely to have emerged.
  • Sarah Reardon in New Scientist expanded the story
    to imagine different lineages of humans with
    different numbers of gene duplications
    of SRGAP2.  When it comes to brain development,
    slow and steady wins the race, she began.  A
    single ancestral human gene that made two copies
    of itself may have helped the evolution of our
    large brains 2.5 million years ago, as our
    ancestors were diverging from australopithecines.

We Became Human by Mistake ?????????
  • Whats interesting about the duplication, Eichler
    says, is that it would have changed brain
    development immediately and dramatically. Human
    ancestors with two, three, or even more
    copies of SRGAP2  and consequently stark
    differences in their cognitive abilities  could
    have been running around together at one point.
    Thats fun to think about, he says.
  • Live Science was even more dramatic about the
    scientific earthquake generated by this fun
    thought.  Eichler said, These episodic and large
    duplication events could have allowed for radical
    potentially Earth-shattering changes in brain
    development and brain function.
  • Yet so little is understood about how the matter
    of the brain connects to the mind, the self,
    cognition and intelligence, as an essay by Sumit
    Paul-Choudhury explored on New Scientist.  Along
    that line, perhaps another PhysOrg article would
    be appropriate in connection with the daring
    assertions above Has modern science become

We Became Human by Mistake ?????????
  • OK if this is a new law of nature, lets count
    all the SRGAP2 genes in mammals and see how they
    correlate with cognitive function.  Are you
    smarter because of knoblike spines on your brain
    cells?  If so, IQ should be a direct reflection
    of your knobs, making some people Einsteins and
    others witless knobs who are spineless.
  • Heres the question you should ask when reading
    stupid claims like this.  How would they ever
    know?  If evolution made a mistake and duplicated
    a gene, then our intelligence arrived by
    mistake.  But evolution is what evolution does
    i.e., this was not a mistake at all.  Stuff

We Became Human by Mistake ?????????
  • Now, if an evolutionist wants to reach outside of
    evolution and engage in philosophy, to determine
    whether something was mistaken, or whether a
    mouses brain is less efficient than a human
    brain, then he (or she) is making reference to
    Truth, something that is outside of nature. 
    Truth must be timeless, universal, necessary, and
    certain.  It is not made of particles, and cannot
  • If, on the other hand, the scientist says that
    science is not about Truth, but about
    exploration, then the game is over.  Science is
    not about finding the truth.  Its just something
    fun to think about (whatever thinking refers to
    in a primate brain with more or less knobs and
    spines).  Maybe its the kind of fun a chimpanzee
    gets from scratching its butt.  So if scratching
    your head or your butt is fun, have at it. 
    Enjoy both ends are equally cognitive.

Coelacanth Survival of the Dullest ?????????
  • A new fossil species of coelacanth was discovered
    in Canada.  Scientists think from its tail fin
    shape that it was a fast swimmerperhaps a
    hunter.  Sadly, it was a spectacular failure in
    evolution.  The luck of the evolutionary draw
    went to todays slow-moving, docile species.
  • PhysOrg states that the new fossil rewrites the
    history of ancient fish.  The discoverers named
    it Rebellatrix, calling it a rebel that does
    everything a coelacanth should not do.  Modern
    coelacanths have broad tails and are fairly
    docile, but the discoverers think that the forked
    tail in Rebellatrix indicates it was a fast
    swimmer with a muscular tail fin. 

Coelacanth Survival of the Dullest ?????????
  • National Geographic pointed out what this means
    to evolutionary theory
  • In general, the discovery shows how plastic and
    flexible evolution can be, said John Long, a
    coelacanth expert at the Natural History Museum
    of Los Angeles County in California.
  • It really shakes things up that coelacanths
    can suddenly deviate what theyve been doing for
    200 million years and occupy a lifestyle thats
    radically different from other coelacanths.
  • Still, the fossil record shows that the
    slow-moving version of the coelacanth ultimately
    won out, while the speedy Rebellatrix was
    replaced by sharks and other cruising predators,
    study leader Wendruff said.
  • I like to say Rebellatrix was a spectacular

Coelacanth Survival of the Dullest ?????????
  • National Geographic also reminded readers about
    the historic importance of the coelacanth as a
    living fossil  The coelacanth (pronounced
    SEE-la-kanth) is a type of primitive, slow-moving
    fish that was thought extinct until its
    rediscovery in 1938, the article said.  The
    modern fish is sometimes called a living fossil,
    because it apparently existed largely unchanged
    for 320 million years.  The new find shows that
    only one species remains from a past diversity
    survival of the dullest.

Coelacanth Survival of the Dullest ?????????
  • Too bad for all the social Darwinists in the
    1930s who glorified strength, speed, warfare and
    might as the evolutionary law of nature.  If
    youre a modern evolutionist, maybe you should
    take a cue from the surviving coelacanths and
    pursue slothfulness (one of the seven deadly
  • Better yet, ditch Darwinism as a falsified
    Victorian myth.  Surviving largely unchanged for
    320 million years should be a colossal
    embarrassment.  So is imagining these creatures
    going extinct millions of years ago then finding
    them doing just fine off the coast of India. 
    Remember, too, that the coelacanth had long been
    touted as a missing link, its bony fins
    suggesting it was a transitional form between
    fish with fins and feet.  Now that coelacanths
    still have those bony fins but dont use them for
    anything resembling walking, that notion has been
    soundly debunked.  Its a survivor why call it

Stem Cells Getting Healthier ????????
  • How they work  Researchers in the Netherlands
    found a new way to culture mouse embryonic stem
    cells in vitro.  They found to their surprise,
    according to Science Daily, that the stem cells
    seem to be on hold, their gene expression
    inhibited, rather than actively transcribing
    genes as previously believed.  From this state,
    the ES cells can efficiently specialize, the
    article said.
  • Embryonic self-sacrifice  Researchers at the
    North Carolina School of Medicine found that
    embryonic stem cells will commit suicide rather
    than risk DNA damage.  A protein called Bax,
    responsible for programmed cell death, is
    activated but kept in a safe place in the Golgi
    apparatus for the crucial days of embryonic
    development.  If DNA damage occurs, Bax migrates
    to the mitochondrion, where it initiates cell
    death.   PhysOrg titled its report, Stem cells
    poised to self-destruct for the good of the
    embryo, as if they will fall on their swords for
    the good of the organism rather than
    let DNA damage propagate.

Stem Cells Getting Healthier ????????
  • Safe adult cells  Techniques for inducing
    pluripotent stem cells from tissues (iPS)
    continue to improve.  PhysOrg reported that
    researchers at Johns Hopkins verified that iPS
    cells contain no more genetic changes than normal
    cells.  This adds confidence that therapies
    developed from them will be safe, not adding
    cancer risk.
  • Skipping a step  According to Science Daily,
    researchers at Duke University were able to
    generate heart muscle tissue from scar tissue
    without going through a stem cell stage by
    programming microRNAs to turn scar cells back
    into heart muscle cells.  By eliminating the need
    for a stem cell transplant, this promises to
    improve the hopes of damage repair for heart
    attack patients.

Stem Cells Getting Healthier ????????
  • Dystrophy hope  It seems like forever that
    people have raised money for muscular dystrophy
    patients.  Is any progress being made?  Yes
    according to PhysOrg, researchers at the
    University of Minnesota have demonstrated a
    therapy using iPS cells that has been shown to
    be effective in the treatment of muscular
    dystrophy.  The mouse model sets the stage for
    human clinical trials.  Researchers were able to
    deliver muscle progenitor cells from iPS cells. 
    Upon transplantation into mice suffering from
    muscular dystrophy, human skeletal myogenic
    progenitor cells provided both extensive and
    long-term muscle regeneration which resulted in
    improved muscle function, the article said.

Stem Cells Getting Healthier ????????
  • The good work continues to come from adult stem
    cells and iPS cells which, unlike embryonic stem
    cells (ES), are ethically sound (not involving
    the destruction of a human embryo). 
    The ES promoters offer hope with hype.  Due to
    these unique properties, expectations for the use
    of ES cells in the clinic are high, but ES cells
    therapies have not yet been developed to full
    potential, the first Science Daily article
    stated.  If iPS cells do better with fewer
    problems and no moral concerns, why is there a
    dispute?  Let human embryos develop into human
    beings, but let adult tissue cells be
    reprogrammed to heal.

Follow the Leader Plants and Animals ?????????
  • Need solutions to engineering problems?  Look no
    further than the plants and animals around you. 
    Thats what more and more scientists are doing.
  • How dry I am  Lotus leaves and gecko toes stay
    clean and dry because they repel water very
    effectively.  They do this with structures that
    are billionths of a meter in size.  The BBC News
    reported how an Australian team of chemists has
    created a super-hydrophobic surface that is
    impossible to wet by imitating the properties
    of the lotus leaf and gecko foot.  A short video
    clip shows how water just beads off the surface. 
    This technology could lead to better raincoats
    and self-cleaning fabrics.

Follow the Leader Plants and Animals ?????????
  • Got those butterfly blues  Nature News reported
    that a Korean team has successfully imitated the
    microstructure of a Morpho butterfly wing to
    create the same shimmering blue color that can be
    seen from many angles when the insect flies.  The
    butterfly uses a combination of regularly-spaced
    ridges and randomness The tight, semi-random
    packing of the ridges makes the wings appear
    bright across a wide range of viewing angles. 
    The Korean team deposited silica microspheres
    onto a surface and then sprayed layers of
    titanium dioxide and silicon dioxide over
    them, Nature said. The resulting film had just
    the right mix of regularity and disorder to
    create the even blue colouring.

Follow the Leader Plants and Animals ?????????
  • The nose knows  An electronic nose is closer to
    reality, thanks to work by a team from the
    American Institute of Physics.  They
    placed DNA molecules specially designed to react
    to certain chemicals on carbon nanotubes that
    conduct electricity.  PhysOrg said, The
    researchers are next interested in creating
    something akin to an actual electronic nose
    consisting of many individual DNA-based sensors
    performing the same role as an olfactory
    receptor.  In biological noses, though, a huge
    variety of chemicals can be differentiated by a
    signal chain that expands and compresses the
    input signals through codes.  It appears the
    electronic version uses a one-to-one type of

Follow the Leader Plants and Animals ?????????
  • Spider men  The dragline silk of garden spiders
    continues to baffle materials scientists who
    would really like to imitate it.  Part of the
    problem is that about 10 of the spiders silk is
    ordered, and 90 is disordered.  Researchers from
    Argonne National Lab looked at the disordered
    portion for clues, PhysOrg reported, untangling
    the mysteries of spider silk.  The amorphous
    regions are made up of all these proteins that
    are incredibly complicated, one researcher
    said.  Another remarked, When it comes to silks,
    humans are just so far behind nature in terms of
    the quality of the materials that we can
    produce.  Solving the mysteries of spider silk
    may bring wonderful new products possessing
    flexibility and strength to the marketplace. 
    Other teams are looking at silkworms for
    additional ideal materials, reported PhysOrg. 
    Think of the advantages As produced by spiders
    and insects, natural silks are made under benign
    conditions ambient temperature, low pressure,
    and with water as solvent.  Its a cinch that
    this is something we should aim to copy when
    designing and making fibers for the future.

Follow the Leader Plants and Animals ?????????
  • Make like a squid  Wouldnt it be cool to have
    clothes that could flicker with color rapidly? 
    Squid, octopi and cuttlefish make this trick look
    easy.  Engineers at the University of Bristol are
    making it happen, reported Science Daily they
    have created artificial muscles that can be
    transformed at the flick of a switch to mimic the
    remarkable camouflaging abilities of organisms
    such as squid and zebrafish.  Imitating the
    chromatophores in squid and zebrafish, the team
    developed artificial versions made of polymers
    connected to electrical circuits.  This might
    lead to smart clothing that can imitate
    natures camouflage something that might help a
    soldier vanish into a changing environment some
    day.  Lead author Jonathan Rossiter said, We
    have taken inspiration from natures designs and
    exploited the same methods to turn our artificial
    muscles into striking visual effects.

Follow the Leader Plants and Animals ?????????
  • Workin on the railroad  Inspired by the
    molecular machines in the cell that move cargo
    along microtubules, British researchers have
    created a molecular track and a two-legged
    walker molecule that can move along it.  Its
    as clumsy as a stick figure compared to a real
    machine, PhysOrg noted, but its a start.
  • If scientists use intelligent design to create
    materials and machines that imitate biological
    counterparts, how can anyone think that the
    biological ones, that are almost always superior
    to the artificial ones, are products of unguided
    processes?  The inference to intelligent design
    is clear.
  • There was no mention of evolution in any of these
    articles, once again, showing that Darwinism is
    useless in the rapidly-expanding field of
    biomimetics.  Speaking of which, can anybody
    think of anything useful Darwins Stuff Happens
    Law has done for mankind?

Evolution for Men and Women ????????
  • Y chromosome?  Because it is a unique structure,
    the Y chromosome in human males seems more
    subject to deleterious mutations.  The Y is also
    unable to distribute linked genes through
    recombination, a process that makes selection
    more effective, the article claimed.
  • Earlier claims that the Y chromosome is evolving
    away to extinction were premature.  PhysOrg
    reassures males, Men can rest easy sex
    chromosomes are here to stay, even though a
    study from University College London was done on
    chickens (no epithets, now).  Humans have a
    unique Y chromosome in males, but chickens have a
    unique W chromosome in females. A research team
    examined how sex-linked genes on the W chromosome
    are passed on.

Evolution for Men and Women ????????
  • The results confirm that although these
    chromosomes have shrunk over millions of
    years, and have lost many of their original
    genes, those that remain are extremely important
    in predicting fertility and are, therefore,
    unlikely to become extinct.
  • Professor Judith Mank, from the UCL Department of
    Genetics, Evolution and Environment and senior
    author said Y chromosomes are here to stay, and
    are not the genetic wasteland that they were once
    thought to be.
  • It was nice of her to rescue the opposite sex. 
    Mank studied sex-linked expression of genes in a
    variety of chicken breeds and found that they
    adapt to selection pressures.  She deduced that
    female-specific selection related to fertility
    acts to shape the W chromosome, and that the
    chromosome is able to respond to
    that selection despite all the problems with the
    lack of recombination.  

Evolution for Men and Women ????????
  • To her, this means evolvability is the key to
    their success
  • Professor Mank said We have shown that Y and W
    chromosomes are very important in fertility the
    Y in males and the W in females. It is the
    ability of the W-linked genes to evolve that is
    the key to their survival, and which suggests
    that both the Y and the W chromosomes are with us
    for the long haul.
  • Oddly, this implies that survival of the fittest
    applies to both the XX and the XY combinations
    selection has produced opposite strategies that
    both work.

Evolution for Men and Women ????????
  • Udder disaster  Female mammals lactate, but milk
    is loaded with calcium.  Why dont breasts
    calcify into stiff, hard structures, like bone?
    Just the thought is rather disconcerting to both
    sexes.  New Scientist came along to explain Why
    milk doesnt turn breasts to bone.  First, the
    Darwin commercial
  • Charles Darwin suggested that lactation
    evolved through natural selection, starting when
    the ancestors of mammals gained a nutritional
    advantage from lapping up sweat-like secretions
    from glands under their mothers skin.
  • This idea had some grounding. Darwin would have
    studied monotremes egg-laying mammals such as
    the echidna. Monotremes have nipple-less mammary
    patches, and these secrete a fluid that provides
    moisture to permeable eggs.

Evolution for Men and Women ????????
  • Reporter Catherine de Lange introduced a problem
    milk has 100 times the calcium and 1000 times the
    protein of these glands.  The glands (one would
    think) would calcify over time, and the milk
    would quickly build toxic fibrils around them.
  • A pair of researchers, Carl Holt (University of
    Glasgow) and John Carver (University of Adelaide)
    found what keeps breast tissue soft and supple. 
    Milk casein has the ability to squirrel away
    the stiffening calcium phosphate into micelles
    naturally occurring polar molecular aggregates
    akin to soap bubbles.

Evolution for Men and Women ????????
  • The Darwin commercial came back for the last
    line Holt and Carver say that the concentration
    of these spherical micelles in milk may have
    increased over evolutionary time, producing a
    progressively more nutritious fluid.
  • True to form, Charles Darwin suggested that
    something evolved over millions of years.  Thats
    because Darwin liberated science from rigor and
    introduced storytelling into science.  Now,
    instead of making scientists work the
    old-fashioned hard way, by trying to tie laws of
    nature to their effects, he introduced the power
    of suggestion granting scientists the ability
    to employ their imaginations and weave tall tales.

Evolution for Men and Women ????????
  • His method was to introduce a new law of nature
    with an impressive name natural selection.  If
    its natural, it must be good, right?  What he
    meant was that random variations occur.  But
    selection has the feel of intelligent design
    about it a problem he aggravated in The
    Origin by comparing it to artificial selection
    (intelligent design).  What to do?  Solution
    personify Nature as an invisible Selector,
    scrutinizing the slightest variations, rejecting
    those that are bad, adding up all the ones that
    are good.
  • This introduced another problem what is good and
    bad in a world ruled by contingency?  Evolution
    is what evolution does.  Its not good or bad. 
    Darwin pivoted by changing natural selection
    into survival of the fittest at the suggestion
    of his buddy, Herbert Spencer.  But since the
    fitness of the fit is undefined, except for
    whatever increases survival, this phrase
    collapsed into the survival of the survivors. 
    Whatever survives is fit by definition even if
    it has traits that are opposite what another
    survivor has.

Evolution for Men and Women ????????
  • So, natural selection became indistinguishable
    from the Stuff Happens Law.  Why are flatworms
    flat and roundworms round?  Stuff happens.  Why
    are sloths slow and cheetahs fast?  Stuff
    happens.  Why do normal chromosomes survive with
    two copies, evolving with the benefit of
    recombination, and sex chromosomes survive with
    one copy, evolving without recombination?  Stuff
  • To keep critics at bay, Darwin bequeathed to his
    disciples a magic wand millions of years. 
    Improbable as a given evolutionary story seems,
    given millions of years that no human ever
    observed or experienced, any stuff can happen.
  • This wonderful new law with its magic wand
    suddenly explained everything.  Now, scientists
    can look fondly back to Father Charlie for giving
    them powerful new explanatory tools to tell the
    peasants about everything in the world. All one
    has to say is something might have evolved this
    way, or may have evolved that way over millions
    of years.  It sounds scientific.  How can anybody
    dispute it?

Evolution for Men and Women ????????
  • Like good Darwinians, Holt and Carver say that
    the concentration of these spherical micelles in
    milk may have increased over evolutionary time,
    producing a progressively more nutritious fluid. 
    (Note Evolutionary time is a synonym for
    millions of years.)  Similarly, Judith Mank
    suggests that even though sex chromosomes have
    shrunk over millions of years they are able to
    respond to selection (meaning, they are
    susceptible to stuff happening).

Evolution for Men and Women ????????
  • Without this powerful army of Darwin disciples
    shouting Stuff Happens in unison and pounding
    their chests, ID advocates might have gotten away
    with announcing that the Junk DNA argument has
    taken another setback (e.g., Y chromosomes are
    not the genetic wasteland they were once thought
    to be).  And nobody will be able to hear
    critical questions e.g., (1) Why has selection
    become effective with opposite outcomes?  (2)
    Where is an unbroken chain of slight
    modifications between monotremes and lactating
    mammals?  (3) Why are monotremes still around
    without the progressively more nutritious
    fluid?  (4) Who is the engineer, and where is
    the squirrel, that can squirrel away calcium
    phosphate into micelles in breast tissue (but not
    in bone) so that lactating breasts stay soft?
  • Whatever other questions come to mind dont
    matter, because an unheard question is
    indistinguishable from an unasked one.

New Chirality Solution Proposed ????????
  • Its long been a mystery why cells use one hand
    of two-handed molecules, like left-handed amino
    acids and right-handed sugars. A new proposal
    solves the mystery, explaining how this
    phenomenon called homochirality arises
    naturally.  Wait a minute
  • Life scientists unlock mystery of how
    handedness arises, announced a headline on
    PhysOrg.  Dr. Thomas G. Mason, a professor of
    chemistry and physics at UCLA, was fascinated by
    the long-standing mystery of how life chooses one
    hand over the other when either isoform is
    equally probable.  Why many of the important
    functional molecules in our bodies almost always
    occur in just one chiral form when they could
    potentially exist in either is a mystery that has
    confounded researchers for years, the article
  • So what is his solution?  Surprisingly, its
    entropy something we usually associate with
    disorder and randomness.

New Chirality Solution Proposed ????????
  • Its quite bizarre, Mason said. Youre
    starting with achiral components triangles
    which undergo Brownian motion and you end up with
    the spontaneous formation of super-structures that
    have a handedness or chirality. I would never
    have anticipated that in a million years.
  • .We discovered that just two physical
    ingredients  entropy and particle shape 
    are enough to cause chirality to appear
    spontaneously in dense systems, Mason said. In
    my 25 years of doing research, I never thought
    that I would see chirality occur in a system of
    achiral objects driven by entropic forces.
  • The body of the article explains, though, that he
    didnt try his experiment with actual amino acids
    or biological molecules.  He experimented with
    colored equilateral triangles, imprinting them on
    a static surface using lithography.  He perceived
    superstructures made up of parallelograms in
    the densely-packed arrangement.

New Chirality Solution Proposed ????????
  • Does this have anything to do with life?  Not
    yet.  Were learning some new physical rules,
    but the story in biology is far from complete. We
    have added another chapter to the story, and Im
    amazed by these findings, he said.
  • Good grief.  Drop the self-serving hype about how
    amazed he was.  This is stupid.  Entropy is not a
    force.   OK, so triangles form parallelograms
    when you artificially etch them onto an
    artificial surface.  Big deal.  This has about as
    much to do with living cells as a backgammon
    board has to do with a backgammon champion.
  • Amino acids are not triangles.  They are
    3-dimensional molecules with complex side
    chains.  Living cells employ homochiral amino
    acids and sugars because they provide the optimum
    arrangement for structure and function of
    proteins and nucleic acids.  They are 100
    one-handed.  Any deviation from 100 pure
    chirality destroys the protein or DNA molecule.

New Chirality Solution Proposed ????????
  • Even more important, the sequence of the amino
    acid building blocks is critical to function. 
    Amino acids do not link together at random.  They
    are forced together by molecular machines
    (ribosomes) that order them according to a
    genetic template, complete with proofreading.
  • That this silly attempt would get published in
    the journal Nature Communications is a sign of
    desperation at not having solved the mystery for
    over a century since Pasteur first noticed it. 
    You know what solves it perfectly?  Intelligent
    design.  If Mason thinks he has written another
    chapter to the story, its a chapter in the
    wrong book the storytelling book, not the
    science textbook.

Best Cave Art Is Still the Oldest ???????????
  • A new research study confirms that the exquisite
    cave art at Chauvet Cave is the oldest.
  • The study is documented in an open-access paper
    on PNAS (May 7, 2012).   The abstract begins,
  • Since its discovery, the Chauvet cave elaborate
    artwork called into question our understanding of
    Palaeolithic art evolution and challenged
    traditional chronological benchmarks.
  • The  artwork on the walls of Chauvet Cave is
    unequalled in Paleolithic art, superior even to
    the better-known works of Lascaux dated much
    later.  Evolutionists had  expected that cave art
    would progress from simple to complex as mans
    cognitive abilities evolved, but Chauvet
    challenged that idea by showing that the oldest
    was by far the best. 

Best Cave Art Is Still the Oldest ???????????
  • The authors of the paper were astonished at its
  • Chauvet cave, in Vallon Pont dArc, Ardèche,
    France, is a site of exceptional scientific
    interest for a number of reasons (i) the variety
    of its majestic parietal (ii) very good
    conservation of the floor and wall
    ornamentations, exhibiting human and animal
    imprints (iii) revelations of unknown
    techniques in Palaeolithic rock art (such as
    stump drawing) (iv) predominance of rare themes
    such as felines and rhinoceroses and
    (v)unequalled aesthetic delivery.
  • The new research tried to corroborate or refute
    carbon dates using a different dating method,
    cosmic ray exposure.

Best Cave Art Is Still the Oldest ???????????
  • Unfortunately for evolutionists, the results
    continue to call into question their
    understanding of the artistic abilities of early
  • Remarkably agreeing with the radiocarbon dates of
    the human and animal occupancy, this study
    confirms that the Chauvet cave paintings are the
    oldest and the most elaborate ever discovered,
    challenging our current knowledge of human
    cognitive evolution.
  • Their last sentence re-emphasized the challenge
    to evolutionary understanding of human
    capabilities These results have significant
    implications for archaeological, human, and rock
    art sciences and seriously challenge rock art
    dating based on stylistic criteria.

Best Cave Art Is Still the Oldest ???????????
  • PhysOrg summarized the paper, stating that the
    scientists determined that a rock fall closed the
    cave for good 21,500 years ago, ensuring that the
    paintings had to have been made much earlier. 
    Finding the oldest and most elaborate cave art
    ever discovered at such an early time implies
    that the method of dating by style (using
    evolutionary assumptions) is no longer valid. 
    Nearly twice as old as the Lascaux paintings that
    are dated at 12,000 to 17,000 years, evolutionary
    scientists estimate the Chauvet paintings date
    from 28,000 to 40,000 years ago, befuddling some
    who believed that early art took on more
    primitive forms.  PhysOrg included a photograph
    of modern-looking footprints that were also found
    in the chamber.

Best Cave Art Is Still the Oldest ???????????
  • The point is not whether their calculated dates
    are correct or not all dating methods depend on
    assumptions that cannot be independently
    verified.  The point here is that evolutionary
    assumptions about the mind of man are 100 off. 
    Cave art started out wonderful and degenerated. 
    The first humans capable of expressing themselves
    artistically on cave walls did so with such
    expertise and unexcelled aesthetic delivery as
    to make Picasso blush.  Why do we listen to
    evolutionists?  Over and over their predictions
    are falsified.  This story matches a Biblical
    account of the creation of man, not a Darwinian
    picture.  Let the evidence speak for itself.
  • This story confirms what we have reported for
    over a decade.  Chauvet has been studied since
    1994.  That they can still believe in evolution
    after 18 years of falsifying evidence is a
    measure of intransigence, not progress in

From Toxin to Medicine ???????
  • Botulinum toxin (botox) is now big business in
    health and fashion, but few may remember it
    derives from one of the deadliest substances
    known in nature.  Other examples show that some
    forms of natural evil can be seen in a
    different light.
  • New Scientist featured a series of articles
    called Drugs with bite The healing powers of

From Toxin to Medicine ???????
  • If you are scared of snakes, scorpions and other
    nasty things, consider how they might save your
  • Have hypertension?  A new remedy called captopril
    comes from the bite of pit vipers.
  • Worried about cancer?  A chlorotoxin from
    scorpions shows promise for cancer treatment.
  • Suffering from severe pain?  A substance called
    Xen2174 from deadly cone snail venom offers hope.
  • For multiple sclerosis or HIV, the venom of the
    deadly cobra is being looked at.
  • Autoimmune diseases may find treatment from the
    stinging cells of sea anemones.
  • Diabetes patients can be prescribed Exenatide, a
    drug from the bites of gila monsters.
  • These new drugs show that theres more than one
    way to look at a scary creature.

From Toxin to Medicine ???????
  •  A T. rex bite could also cure headache
    instantly.  This subject should not minimize the
    harm from creatures to humans, but does point out
    two interesting possibilities (1) toxins are
    just molecules with delivery methods that are not
    evil in themselves (2) perhaps some of these
    substances originally had beneficial functions. 
    Only Biblical creationists have an answer to
    natural evil the original creation contained
    no suffering, and some day it will be redeemed. 
    In the meantime, lets continue to look for good
    uses for bad things out in nature.

Lamarckism Dead but Useful ???????,???
  •  Lamarcks theory of evolution was supposed to
    have died in 1859 when Darwin published his
    theory of natural selection.  Despite textbook
    depictions of Lamarckism as obsolete, Lamarckian
    language still surfaces from time to time, even
    in prestigious journals.
  • A recent example of speaking like a Lamarckian
    was detected in Science this month (4 May 2012)
    in an article entitled, How the Modern Body
    Shaped Up.  Evolutionists are not supposed to
    speak in terms of use and disuse and
    inheritance of acquired characteristics, but
    reporting on a meeting of the American
    Association of Physical Anthropologists,
    correspondent Ann Gibbons came pretty close A
    remarkably comprehensive analysis of more than
    2000 European skeletons presented at the meeting
    reveals how cultural changes have altered our
    physiques, she said.

Lamarckism Dead but Useful ???????,???
  • In all fairness, she could have been speaking of
    how random mutations that were naturally selected
    led to better adapted physiques and
    undoubtedly, if questioned, she would affirm
    that.  Yet for the anthropologists she quoted, it
    seemed too tempting to speak of humans acquiring
    their physiques by Lamarckian pressures
  • Modern humans have gone through a lot of changes
    in the past 30,000 years. We switched from
    hunting and gathering to farming and herding
    from life as nomads to settling in urban centers
    from eating meat, nuts, and tubers to consuming
    grains, sugars, and dairy products. Now, a
    remarkably comprehensive analysis of more than
    2000 European skeletons presented at the meeting
    reveals how these cultural changes have altered
    our physiques. When you become a modern human,
    what happens to your body? asked
    paleoanthropologist Christopher Ruff of Johns
    Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland,
    co-chair of the session on skeletal adaptation in
    recent Europeans.

Lamarckism Dead but Useful ???????,???
  • If cultural changes to anatomy are not
    Lamarckian, what are they?  According to
    neo-Darwinism sensu strictu, changes due to habit
    have to find expression in the gametes through
    mutation and natural selection.  In the second
    paragraph, Gibbons seemed to mix Darwinian and
    Lamarckian mechanisms
  • While other studies have documented a decrease in
    height after the transition to agriculture, this
    is the first systematic study of how the skeleton
    changed from the time modern humans spread
    through Europe 30,000 years ago until they were
    circling the globe in jets by the 1960s. In 10
    posters, Ruff and his colleagues focused on how
    each part of the body, from the spine to leg and
    arm bones, evolved over time through both genetic
    and cultural change.
  • One anthropologist attributed a drop in strength
    of leg bones to the switch from a hunting and
    gathering lifestyle to the sedentary life of the
    farmer.  Another attributed changes in upper body
    strength to agriculture. 

Lamarckism Dead but Useful ???????,???
  • Recalling how Lamarck argued that men with strong
    arms from work might pass that trait on to their
    sons, its hard to get more Lamarckian than the
    description of how anatomical changes occurred
  • Over the same 30,000-year period, upper body
    strength declined after the introduction of
    agriculture. In males, it then increased in the
    Medieval period, possibly due to intensive
    upper-body labor such as blacksmithing. One trend
    through time is that the right arm lost much of
    its asymmetric larger size compared to the left
    arm, perhaps due to fewer strongly lateralized
    activities such as spear throwing. Women show
    particularly symmetrical arms from the beginning
    of agriculture 7000 years ago to Europes Bronze
    Age, 3000 years ago. The researchers suspect that
    this stems from using both arms to make flour
    with grinding stones.

Lamarckism Dead but Useful ???????,???
  • Perhaps its too tedious or confusing to speak in
    strict Darwinian terms, calling on random
    mutations to be selected.  For Gibbons and the
    anthropologists she interviewed, Lamarckian
    terminology the environment or culture leading
    to adaptations directly may be a tempting
    shortcut.  Even so, there were no disclaimers in
    the article, despite its subject of how the human
    body evolved over time.
  • Another example was found on PhysOrg, where Dean
    Falk (University of Florida) attributed the shape
    of the Taung baby (a hominid fossil) as an
    environmental adaptation The persistent metopic
    suture is an adaptation for giving birth to
    babies with larger brains is related to the
    shift to a rapidly growing brain after birth
    and may be related to expansion in the frontal
    lobes.  Mutations in the birth canal should have
    nothing to do with mutations in the brain.

Evolutionists Need to Mind Their Matters
  • To a Darwinian evolutionist, the mind is the
    product of unguided mutations and random
    environmental pressures acting on material
    forces.  This raises questions about the mind and
    morals do they have any validity?  Evolutionists
    need to mind their matter.  The following
    examples show how they try to justify these
    non-material entities arising from matter in
  • The smart thing  Intelligence is an immaterial
    property that, to an evolutionist, must be an
    epiphenomenon or illusion arising from particles
    in motion.  New Scientist asked whether
    intelligence what distinguishes humans from
    the myriad other species with which we share our
    planet can be explained in evolutionary

Evolutionists Need to Mind Their Matters
  • The article is more a question than an answer
    about intelligence
  • It is a key factor in everything from our anatomy
    to our technology. To ask why we are intelligent
    is to ask why we are human it admits no discrete
    answer. But lets ask it here anyway. Why are we,
    alone in nature, so smart?
  • One answer is that maybe we arent as smart as we
    think we are.  Maybe our anthropocentric
    conceit prevents us from fully appreciating the
    intelligence of other animals, be they ants,
    cephalopods or cetaceans.  This approach
    however, invokes one immaterial concept, conceit,
    to dodge another, intelligence.  It seems the
    article is marching in place so far. 

Evolutionists Need to Mind Their Matters
  • Time for another tentative step
  • So lets rephrase the question. There is a
    cluster of abilities that seems unique to humans
    language, tool use, culture and empathy. Other
    animals may have rudimentary forms of these
    abilities, but they do not approach humans
    sophistication and flexibility. Why not?
  • Again, though, language, tool use, culture and
    empathy are immaterial, so this approach suffers
    the same shortcomings.  Appeals to variations of
    intelligence within species doesnt solve the
    problem.  At this point, the anonymous author of
    this article leapt into storybook land about why
    not all chimps became champs of intelligence

Evolutionists Need to Mind Their Matters
  • Some did, but a long time ago our own
    ancestors. Somewhere in our evolutionary history,
    there were presumably similarly prodigious
    protohumans, produced by some accident of
    genetics or environment, whose greater
    intelligence gave them the edge over their
    less gifted peers. Todays chimp prodigies do not
    seem to profit from their intelligence in the
    same way. Their society and environment do not
    reward it as ours did.
  • So our ancestors may have been fortuitously placed
    to embark on the runaway cycle of biological and
    cultural development that led to modern,
    multitasking humans and to a level of
    adaptability that allows us to adjust readily to
    changes in our environment, and even modify it to
    suit ourselves.

Evolutionists Need to Mind Their Matters
  • To avoid belaboring the point that words
    like history, prodigy, gifted, reward,
    and suit refer to immaterial concepts and values,
    this answer reduces to stuff happens we got
    smart fortuitously, by some accident of
    genetics or environment.  If intelligence is an
    accident, though, philosophers will want to know
    what gives it validity to be turned on itself to
    ask questions about its own origin.
  • The right thing  Kate Douglas tried to
    evolutionize morality with a book review for New
    Scientist entitled, When did our ancestors learn
    to do the right thing? but whether she did the
    right thing evolutionarily is the question at
    issue.  The book under review is Christopher
    Boehms Moral Origins The evolution of virtue,
    altruism, and shame.  A social anthropologist,
    Boehm studied the !Kung people of the Kalahari
    Desert in South Africa for answers.  He believes
    the !Kung mimic the original moralists late
    Pleistocene foraging societies living in Africa
    45,000 years ago. 

Evolutionists Need to Mind Their Matters
  • Heres his thesis in a nutshell
  • So how did we evolve from amoral apes to moral
    humans? It is a question that has perplexed many,
    from Darwin onward, but what sets Boehms
    approach apart is his effort