Today in Evolution
Every day there is something published that falls under the category of "science falsely so called" (1 Timothy 6:20). Science requires observable, empirical, measurable evidence to validate someones model or hypothesis. Once it is verified then it can be considered a reasonable scientific theory. What is being done is they are looking at one fossil and comparing it to another fossil and concluding that one must have evolved from the other. THIS IS NOT SCIENCE. Here in 'Today in Evolution' one of the things we hope to show you the lack of actual science being done when fossils are being used as evidence for evolution.
| Vision Ion Gateway in 600 Million Year Old Hydra |
 |
 |
 |
| 11 March 2010 | |
|
Researchers from the University of California, Santa Barbra's Department of Ecology have determined that the hydra, a tiny sea creature, uses ion gateways to detect light in a similar way to that of humans. Hydra are tiny creatures that belong to the same evolutionary phylum jelly fish. These creatures have been in existence since the Pre-Cambrian era of 600 million years ago (according to evolutionary dating methods).
There are many genes that are responsible for vision in vertebrate animals and humans one of which is the gene osprin. Osprin is responsible for creating the ion channel which is used for light sensitivity. From this discovery researchers at UCSB concluded that this "Illustrates how all organisms - humans included - are a complex mix of ancient and new characteristics."
Is this a fact, or is this a belief? Science only deals with subjects that can be tested, studied, or observed (such as researching the genes that are responsible for vision). This means that science alone cannot determine how the object being tested originated.
The logic used to explain the origin of vision could be as follows, Since humans and hydra have similar genes that are used to create light sensitive pathways: a. Humans and hydra had a common ancestor. b. Humans and hydra had independently evolved this characteristic. c. Humans and hydra were both designed and built to see a similar range of the electromagnetic spectrum.
Conclusions a. or b. could not have been reached without a presupposition that vertical evolution (molecules to man) is true. Today we do not observe large amounts of new and more complex information being added to any genome. To assume that it happened in the past even once requires a leap of faith. Assuming it happened multiple times in the past independently with the same result requires a vast leap of faith.
The only reason we can learn anything about the world around us is because in the beginning God created a universe that runs in a continuously orderly fashion. From this order we can use science to show how it is impossible for genes to pop into existence all by themselves.
Adapted from materials provided by UCSB - http://www.ia.ucsb.edu/pa/display.aspx?pkey=2199
|
| Chimp and Human Y Chromosomes Evolving Quickly |
|
|
|
| 13 January 2010 | |
|
When discussing the supposed evolutionary ancestor of chimpanzees and humans it is often cited that we share a large percentage of our DNA with each other; however, this year the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research has conducted the very first interspecies comparison of the chimp and human Y chromosomes and discovered that they are very different.
This is only the second time that a chimp Y chromosome has been completely decoded. When the chimp genome was first decoded in 2005 they skipped large portions of the Y chromosome because the decoding process did not work well due to the long repetitive sequences.
Good Science “The results overturned the expectation that the chimp and human Y chromosomes would be highly similar. Instead, they differ remarkably in their structure and gene content. The chimp Y, for example, has lost one third to one half of the human Y chromosome genes--a significant change in a relatively short period of time.”
Bad Conclusion “In chimps, this potent combination of intense selective pressure on sperm production genes and the inability to swap genes may have fueled the Y chromosome’s rapid evolution.”
The Y chromosome in humans contains about 60 million base pairs. Individual genes are made of several base pairs but a change of 30% - 50% would still be millions of changes. Drawing a conclusion using empirical science requires observation of the change occurring. Comparing two gene sequences side by side can never determine if the two subjects were ever related or how long they have been in existence.
Humans arrived on this planet in one of two ways: 1. We evolved. 2. We were created.
If your presupposition is that we evolved then you look at the evidence and make it fit your world view. This means that if you discover a chimpanzee and human chromosome are very different from each other you then need to make the leap of faith that the chromosome had to have changed very rapidly.
If you believe the Bible is true and believe that God created the monkey kind different than the human kind then it is no surprise to discover millions of differences between chimps and us. Adapted from materials provided by Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research http://www.wi.mit.edu/news/archives/2010/dp_0113.html Image: National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI)
|
| Genetic Material from a Virus |
|
|
|
| 08 January 2010 | |
|
Before the discovery of genetics and the study of DNA, Darwinian evolution was based on a process of particles emitted from cells that would effectively vote on what the offspring would look like. If you had more human like cells your offspring would be more human, but if you had more monkey like cells your offspring would be more monkey. This hypothesis was rejected when DNA was discovered and replaced with Neo-Darwinian evolution that teaches positive evolution occurred when sufficient genetic changes took place in the germ cells that were passed onto the next generation. The question is, were did these positive mutations come from? Researchers at the University of Texas at Arlington and Osaka University in Japan are saying that eight percent of the human genome is made up of material inserted from bornaviruses. A bornavirus is a RNA virus that replicates and transcribes in the nucleus. Some RNA viruses can replicate themselves into the hosts DNA in germ cells and therefore get passed onto the next generation. Since DNA replication has build in error checking that limits genetic mistakes many people claim that this type of genetic insertion is responsible for Neo-Darwinian evolution. The problem is that bornaviruses and retroviruses have always been observed to have negative effects. A bornavirus is attributed to a plague that occurred in 1885 killing many horses and is believed to cause schizophrenia and other mood disorders in humans. Retroviruses have been linked to cancer, HIV, and other immunodeficiency diseases.
While these viruses may provide a gain in genetic information, they do not provide an increase in beneficial genetic information. In the beginning God created us with all the genetic material we needed. Since then mutations and insertions have cause our DNA to get worse and worse. Even the best office photo copy machine starts to loose resolution after a few hundred generations (remember the handouts you used to receive at school that were copied too many times). We should be in awe of the amazing DNA copy machines that God has designed to keep us (almost) fully functional for thousands of years.
Your office copy machine did not happen by random chance and neither did your DNA copy machine. Adapted from materials provided by Endogenous non-retroviral RNA virus elements in mammalian genomes. Nature, 2010; 463 (7277): 84 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature08695 Virology: Bornavirus enters the genome. Nature, 2010; 463 (7277): 39 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/463039a
|
| Appendix Not Vestigial Anymore |
|
|
|
| 21 August 2009 | |
|
Today, if you were to look in a biology textbook or do a search on Wikipedia on the term 'vestigial organ' the first entry you would see is a picture of the human appendix. The appendix was considered by Charles Darwin as vestigial due to its apparent lack of use in every day life. The information Darwin did not have access to was how the every day cycle your body goes through can rapidly change if you drink the water in Mexico.
The appendix is store house of good bacteria. On a daily basis you have no immediate need for this bacteria and sometimes from lack of use your appendix can become inflamed (appendicitis). However, after a case of diarrhea the bacteria in your gut become sparse and the appendix kicks in to action to repopulate the missing bacteria.
Vestigial means that an object has lost all of its original function. So is the appendix vestigial? No.
Even if our bodies contained vestigial structures that would be the opposite of evolution. In order to prove evolution happened you would need to see a non-existing organ appear and fulfill a useful function. If our bodies contain any organs that are vestigial, that would be proof we used to be better and now are getting worse.
"Maybe it's time to correct the textbooks," says William Parker, PhD, assistant professor of surgical sciences at Duke and the senior author of the study. I completely agree.
Adapted from materials provided by Duke University Medical Center
|
| Planet Spins Wrong Direction |
|
|
|
| 13 August 2009 | |
|
According to the nebular hypothesis, the sun and all its planets have formed from one large spinning nebula. As the nebula collapsed to form the protostar the remaining material would form the planets. According to the conservation laws an object will continue to spin until another object comes in contact with it (conservation laws have never been shown to be violated). If the nebular hypothesis is true then all the objects in a solar system should be revolving and spinning in the same direction.
Since even the nearest star is too far away to see with the best telescopes it is not possible to directly observe a planet in another solar system but scientists monitor the visible light they receive from other solar systems and determine if a planet is transiting between us and the star. Recently the UK's WASP Project (Wide Area Search for Planets) discovered WASP-17, a planet twice the size of Jupiter, that appears to be revolving around it's parent star in the wrong direction. If there observation is correct (taking into account no one has actually seen this star) that would mean the WASP-17 solar system did not form from from the evolutionary nebular hypotheses.
The graduate students that studied WASP-17 say it must have been involved in a collision with another nearby planet in order to cause the planet's orbit to reverse.
- Hypothesis: Nebula spins one direction, planets orbit same direction. - Observation: Most of universe spins one direction, this planet revolves wrong direction. - Conclusion: Even though everything is spinning one direction, at some point another planet must have decided to start traveling in a different direction. This mysterious other planet collided with WASP-17 and therefore caused it to start orbiting backwards also.
How did that first planet start going backwards? If our solar system formed from a spinning nebula why does our sun contain 99% of the systems mass but only 2% of its angular momentum (It should contain most of the angular momentum having received most of the mass from the nebula)? Why do Venus and Uranus spin backwards along with at least 6 moons? If our solar system formed from the same nebula with the same elements why are the planets composed of all very different elements?
Not only is it impossible for a nebula to gravitationally collapse because of Boyle's Gas Law, but this is not the only object found in the universe spinning backward. At the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan using the Subaru telescope researchers discovered the planet HAT-P-7b also spinning in a backwards orbit (or the planet tipped in a way it should not be). Also many years ago the galaxy NGC 4622 was photographed with its spiral arms spinning the wrong way according to the cosmological evolution.
If an object in motion stays in motion until another object comes in contact with it AND the Big Bang is true than all objects in the universe should be spinning in the same direction. Either Newton's First Law of Motion is wrong or the Big Bang is wrong.
By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. Psalm 33:6
Adapted from materials provided by http://www.scitech.ac.uk/PMC/PRel/STFC/wasp17.aspx
|
| Primate Brain Evolution |
|
|
|
| 22 June 2009 | |
|
Researchers from the University of Florida and the University of Winnipeg have performed a detailed CT scan on a fossil mammal brain from an Ignacius graybullianus that is a member of the primate order known as plesiadapiforms. According to evolutionary classifications plesiadapiforms are an early cousin of primates and humans that lived 54 million years ago. Despite the fact that Ignacius graybullianus was the size of a squirrel the researchers made some far reaching conclusions about how it and its relatives lived.
The presupposition exists that apes and humans are related. This leads some people to compare human brains and ape brains in an effort to determine how they may have evolved from a common ancestor. Instead of studying humans (that are observable and testable in the present) and apes (that are observable and testable in the present), this study has chosen to study a rodent like creature that no one alive today has ever seen or knows anything about.
Science deals with subjects we can test, study, observe, and repeat. No one has ever seen a rodent like creature turn into apes or humans. No one has ever seen a rodent like creature turn into anything but other rodent like creatures. No one has ever seen a brain of an Ignacius to observe how it works.
“A large and complex brain has long been regarded as one of the major steps that sets primates apart from the rest of mammals,” said Florida Museum vertebrate paleontologist and study co-author Jonathan Bloch. “At our very humble beginnings, we weren’t so special. That happened over tens of millions of years.”
One of the ways atheism is inconsistent with its evolutionary world view is the conclusion that we are in someway special. If evolution is true and humans are related to apes, monkeys, and Ignacius graybullianus then there is nothing special about us. Your consciousness is only as valid as the random firing impulses in your brain make it to be. If we all evolved from the same soup as a mosquito then our decisions should be no more or no less important than a mosquito. If evolution is true than morality is determined by society. If morality is determined by society than no one has the right to say a persons actions are right or wrong. Is it wrong for a mosquito to steal your blood without your permission? Is it wrong for a person to steal your blood without permission? Why? Are we all not just leaves on this big bush we call evolution?
According to the Bible there is a special difference between you and the animals. Your conscience.
Con = Derived from the Latin: with Science = First definition of science is: knowledge Conscience = With knowledge
Every time you sin you do it with knowledge that what you are doing is wrong. Not only has God provided us with a moral law so we can know that coveting is wrong, lying is wrong, stealing is wrong, looking with lust is wrong, murder is wrong, dishonoring our parents is wrong, not setting aside time for God is wrong, blaspheming God's name by using it casually is wrong, making up a god that we like better than the God of the Bible is wrong, and not putting God first is wrong, but God has also given us a conscience so even if you have not heard the commandments you still have enough knowledge to know from nature that there is a God and that you have sinned against Him.
But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. (Romans 5:8-9) For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. (Ephesians 2:8-10)
Romans 1 & 2 ... For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel. ...
Studying a fossil of a creature that you have never seen and determining how it lived and how its cousins evolved is like determining what someones occupation is by going to a junk yard and studying their brothers car.
Adapted from materials provided by http://news.ufl.edu/2009/06/22/primate-brain/
|
| Competitive Brain Evolution |
|
|
|
| 22 June 2009 | |
|
University of Missouri researchers have examined three possible hypothesis of why the brain evolved: climate change, ecological demands and social competition. The study analyzed 153 hominid skulls and the results showed that the population density had a larger effect on the evolving brain then global climate changes and the number of parasites in the region.
“Our findings suggest brain size increases the most in areas with larger populations and this almost certainly increased the intensity of social competition,” said David Geary, Curator's Professor and Thomas Jefferson Professor of Psychosocial Sciences in the MU College of Arts and Science. “When humans had to compete for necessities and social status, which allowed better access to these necessities, bigger brains provided an advantage.”
- It is good to see that UM correctly used the word hypothesis to describe the models they were trying to research. According to the scientific method you start with a hypothesis, do experimentation, and if your repeatable experiments support your hypothesis you can then call it a theory. Unfortunately, no experiments were done that observed any brain evolution.
- No fossil is proof of evolution. Matching up skulls and putting them in a line does not prove one evolved into another. Fossils only form when a specimen is rapidly covered in mud or sediment, otherwise the bones would decompose within a few years. Fossils are good evidence that the strata they were found in was laid down by water.
- Since the strata the hominid skulls were found in were laid down by water you could never tell where the person was living. All you know is where they got buried.
- Since the strata the hominid skulls were found in were laid down by water you could never tell what the parasite count was like for that area because if the strata was exposed for longer would have more pests than strata that was buried quickly.
- Since the strata the hominid skulls were found in were laid down by water you could never tell what the environment was like when the person was living. Even with hundreds of years of research weather forecasters still can not accurately tell us what the weather will be like next week but somehow they can tell what it was like 2 million years ago?
- Necessity will never cause evolution. If you need to have a larger brain to survive and your DNA does not contain the information to grow a larger brain, then you will not survive. NO amount of outside pressure will cause a beneficial mutation that increases genetic complexity.
Adapted from materials provided by http://munews.missouri.edu/news-releases/2009/0622-geary-big-brain.php
|
| Dino to Bird Finger Evolution |
|
|
|
| 18 June 2009 | |
|
A fossil dinosaur called Limusaurus inextricabilis was found in Junggar Basin of Xinjiang in northwestern China and is said to be a transitional fossil between dinosaurs and birds. The basis for this claim is centered around the skull having no teeth (indicating it may have had a beak) and its finger bone structure.
Humans have five finger digits labeled from thumb to pinky I, II, III, IV, and V. Since most animals have a common design they also share common arm/wrist/hand structures. Some people that believe in evolution have attributed this to a common ancestor and therefore label dinosaur and bird hand digits using the same numbers 1 through 5. This becomes a problem for evolutionists because developmental observation has shown birds have digits II, III, and IV while fossil evidence indicates dinosaurs have digits I, II, and III. If dinosaurs evolved into birds then the dinosaur hand would have had to evolve a fourth digit and loose the first digit.
This new Limusaurus fossil shows something very different from the standard model of how bird digits evolved. The digit number is determined by where the bone is anchored to the wrist and by the number of bones in the finger. Limusaurus has what appears to be a very short first digit and a extended second digit with no signs of a new fourth digit. This fossil therefore shows evidence contrary to the standard model of loosing one digit and adding another. James Clark of George Washington University and Xu Xing of the Chinese Academy of Science's Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology in Beijing have hypothesized a new model of finger evolution claiming that instead of loosing one digit and adding another the fingers must have somehow changed the number of bones in the digit while maintaining its location on the wrist. There is no experimental or observational evidence of this and most evolutionary scientists would say the observational embryonic development shows just the opposite.
This fossil is not proof that evolution happened but is proof that evolution could not have happened due to the dissimilar bone structure. No fossil is proof of evolution. No amount of observational science performed on a fossil can tell you if that creature turned into a different kind of animal sometime in the past. The evidence supports that this creature was designed to function just fine in its environment and does not show any signs of useless or vestigial features. There are several other odd creatures around today like the platypus, the aye-aye lemur, or the tarsier that are each uniquely suited for their environment.
The finger evolution is the least of the worries if you are trying to turn a dinosaur into a bird. There are thousands of differences between birds and dinosaurs and changing one piece at a time would be detrimental to its survival. Slow gradual changes won't leave you with a new better animal, it will leave you with a deformed mutant that is unable to survive.
Note: No evidence of feathers was found. The artist drew feathers because of the presupposition that dinosaurs turned into birds.
http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=114988&org=NSF&from=news
|
| Birds Did Not Evolve From Theropod Dinosaurs |
|
|
|
| 09 June 2009 | |
|
Popular movies or TV shows often dogmatically teach that birds evolved from dinosaurs over the past 100 million years but rarely comment on the fact that some scientists disagree. A study from Oregon State University recently explained another reason why it is not possible for dinosaurs to be the ancestor of modern birds. Some of the differences between birds and dinosaurs: Birds are “warm blooded” and endothermically (internally) regulate their body temperature. Reptiles are “cold blooded” and ectothermically (externally) regulate their body temperature. Birds have a very high metabolism and a need for large amounts of oxygen. Reptiles are usually lethargic and not very active. Birds have special respiratory systems that utilize air sacks allowing air to always flow in one direction through the lung and maximize the oxygen extraction rate. Reptiles have lungs similar to humans where air flows both directions (in then out).
When you watch a bird breathe they externally appear to function in the same way as a human but internally the birds lungs are much different from other animals. While inhaling the clean air passes through the lungs, extracts the oxygen, and then that used air is stored in anterior air sacks. At the same time some clean air also fills the posterior air sacks for use during the exhale cycle. When the exhale cycle begins a check valve closes that allows the anterior air sack to discharge the used air and allows the clean air in the posterior air sacks to discharge through the lungs and extract the oxygen. While inhaling and exhaling air is always moving in one direction through the bird lungs. (see photo) This unique design produces about 20 times more oxygen flow than a reptile lung.
The study from OSU focused on the femur and leg structure of birds compared to dinosaurs. “It’s been known for decades that the femur, or thigh bone in birds is largely fixed and makes birds into “knee runners,” unlike virtually all other land animals,” the OSU experts say. “What was just discovered, however, is that it’s this fixed position of bird bones and musculature that keeps their air-sac lung from collapsing when the bird inhales.” “The position of the thigh bone and muscles in birds is critical to their lung function, which in turn is what gives them enough lung capacity for flight.”
Almost every other animal that walks on land uses their hip as the pivot point to move their legs. This includes the birds supposed evolutionary precursor the theropod dinosaur. While there are thousands of empirical, observable, measurable, differences between birds and reptiles this is just another example of how real science can be used to refute the pseudo-science (unobservable, unmeasurable, unrepeatable) of evolution.
So after drawing the conclusion that dinosaurs could not have evolved into birds did the researchers conclude that birds are fearfully and wonderfully made and intricately designed to fly? Of course not. They just added more of the magic ingredient: time.
Reptile + 65 million years = Bird --- No Reptile + 120 million years = Bird --- No Reptile + 200 million years = Bird --- Maybe Reptile + 300 million years = Bird --- Of Course
The Bible clearly teaches that birds were created on day 5 of the creation week and land reptiles were created on day 6. The Bible is not a science book, but when it speaks on science it speaks accurately. All of the real science (observable science) points us to the conclusion that one kind of animal can not evolve into another kind of animal. In the beginning the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and if He is the creator then He is also the owner and has the right to tell us how to live. If you have transgressed His law then you will be guilty, But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. (Romans 5)
|
| Junk DNA Has a Vital Role After All |
|
|
|
| 30 May 2009 | |
|
Inside everyone of your cells lies the most complicated piece of software ever written. The code is so complex that although we know the language it is written in (adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C) and thymine (T)), we still don't know how to read it nor do we know how most of it functions. “Most people do not realize that all our genes only comprise about 3% of the total human genome. The rest is basically one large black box”, says Kevin Verstrepen, heading the research team from the VIB laboratory of Systems Biology, K.U.Leuven.
For years many evolutionists have been using so called 'Junk DNA' as an proof of evolution, saying it is the evolutionary remnant of previous ancestors that is no longer needed. This research team (along with several others in the past years) shows another empirical proof that the extra DNA does actually do something so now 'Junk DNA' can rest in the field with all the other debunked vestigial organs.
In an experiment where the researchers tested the adaptability of yeast cells that were missing the repeating sections of 'Junk DNA' they found the normal cells were able to survive better. “If this was the real world” the researchers say “only cells with the repeats would be able to swiftly adapt to changes, thereby beating their repeat-less counterparts in the game of evolution. Their junk DNA saved their lives”.
Once again science has confirmed a truth that is taught in the scripture, that we aren't just random collections with extra particles but we have been intricately designed to survive. Do we now put our trust in this experiment and use it as a platform to show the Bible is a book of science? No...
Science comes and science goes. In the next year fifty new experiments will be published, each one of them blaspheming the name of God by taking the glory He deserves for creating the world and giving it to the idol of 'mother nature' who evolved the world. Dr. Cary Parker, an author of several science textbooks on DNA, once said, “Maybe you've has some one say to you, 'You can't take the Bible as a textbook of science'. I like to say your right about that, I've written five textbooks of science and they've all had to be rewritten.”
The field of modern science was founded by people that believed that God created this planet in a reasonable way so that we can experiment to find out how this world operates. Our experiments may be right or our experiments may be wrong but the Word of God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. We don't put our trust in the achievements of this world, but we put our trust in the one who created this world.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/324/5931/1213
|
