From Ann Gauger at at Evolution News & Views: Yesterday started out as an ordinary Tuesday. Then I set out to read a recent paper published in the journal Cell, “Nuclear Localization of Mitochondrial TCA Cycle Enzymes as a Critical Step in Mammalian Zygotic Genome Activation,” by R Nagaraj et al. It reported something rather odd that caught my eye. Very early embryos (at the two- or four-cell stage in mouse or human respectively) undergo a critical transition: they have to go from relying on RNAs and proteins loaded into the egg before fertilization by the mother, to making their own RNA and protein. The phenomenon is called embryonic genome activation. In order to activate their genomes, embryos have to Read More ›

From ScienceDaily: They have determined that several thousands of the retroviruses that have established themselves in our genome may serve as “docking platforms” for a protein called TRIM28. This protein has the ability to “switch off” not only viruses but also the standard genes adjacent to them in the DNA helix, allowing the presence of ERV to affect gene expression. This switching-off mechanism may behave differently in different people, since retroviruses are a type of genetic material that may end up in different places in the genome. This makes it a possible tool for evolution, and even a possible underlying cause of neurological diseases. In fact, there are studies that indicate a deviating regulation of ERV in several neurological diseases Read More ›

From Jernej Ule at RealClearScience, where he explains his team’s findings, then reflects, We’ve known for decades that evolution needs to tinker with genetic elements so they can accumulate mutations while minimising disruption to the fitness of a species. Our most recent research, published in the journal eLife, looked at over 6,000 Alu elements to show that our code does exactly this. The two forces are tightly coupled in evolution, so that as soon as any mutations make the ying stronger, the yang catches up and stops them. This allows the Alu elements to remain in a harmless state in our DNA over long evolutionary periods, during which they accumulate a lot of change via mutations. As a result, they Read More ›

It is often a claim of atheists/naturalists that certain individuals, groups or positions are “anti-science”. There is a narrative now that the Trump administration is “anti-science” because Trump and certain cabinet nominees do not subscribe to certain so-called “scientific” views, such as AGW or certain evolutionary claims, and do not intend to set policy according to certain views held by many scientists. I doubt anyone except perhaps actual Luddites are “anti-science” in any truthful interpretation of the word. Trump and his entire team, ID advocates and Christians of virtually every kind embrace science and use technology. Christians basically invented science and made most of the great scientific discoveries in history, whether or not those discoveries coincided with their religious views Read More ›

From ScienceDaily: The study examined DNA methylation — an “annotation” of DNA that alters gene expression without changing the genomic sequence itself — in a group of diverse Latino children. Methylation is one type of “epigenetic mark” that previous research has shown can be either inherited or altered by life experience. The researchers identified several hundred differences in methylation associated with either Mexican or Puerto Rican ethnicity, but discovered that only three-quarters of the epigenetic difference between the two ethnic subgroups could be accounted for by differences in the children’s genetic ancestry. The rest of the epigenetic differences, the authors suggest, may reflect a biological stamp made by the different experiences, practices, and environmental exposures distinct to the two ethnic Read More ›

Wayne Rossiter holds a PhD in ecology and evolution from Rutgers and is an assistant biology professor at Waynesburg University.  In a comment to another post he writes: Literally, Jesus is their great stumbling block. Consider the words of Darrel Falk (one of the BioLogos founders): “Faith in Christ’s resurrection is thus the single most important belief that Christians hold. Is it scientifically credible? . . . It is not. Yet this is the position we hold. to a scientist . . . the belief in a risen body is irrational.” They think that purely scientific explanations for the world are compatible with Christian theism…except on Jesus. There, they will fly in the face of their science. But why? And Read More ›

From Hannah Devlin at Guardian: According to Bruno Lemaitre, an immunologist at the EPFL research institute in Switzerland, it is no longer enough to be right – or even to get there first. Reaching the top of the scientific hierarchy increasingly depends on a glittering media profile, publishing in “trophy journals” and cultivating a network of academic frenemies who are treated as close allies until they become obstacles in the path to academic glory. But performers don’t create that atmosphere; audiences do. Speaking last week at the MRC London Institute of Medical Sciences, Lemaitre described the cut-throat atmosphere of world-class laboratories and international conferences as closer to House of Cards than The Big Bang Theory. Because scientists would rather party Read More ›

From Carl Straumsheim at Inside Higher Ed: Beall’s lists have been controversial among researchers and scholarly communications experts. Advocates of open-access publishing have criticized Beall for being overly negative toward the model. In a 2013 essay, for example, Beall wrote that the open-access movement is an “anti-corporatist, oppressive and negative movement, one that uses young researchers and researchers from developing countries as pawns.” Some publishers have objected to being featured on the lists. OMICS International, a publisher Beall has previously described as “the worst of the worst,” in 2013 threatened to sue Beall, seeking $1 billion in damages. But Beall has also received credit for highlighting a growing problem in the field of scholarly publishing. A 2015 study by researchers Read More ›

No, really. From the home of the Boltzmann brain wars and information as a physical quality, we now learn, Protesting the incoming Trump administration’s anti-science agenda may not be easy – but it’s vital not just for the US, but the world THE stamp of jackboots, raps on the door, marches and uniforms; these are what we associate with the emergence of an authoritarian state. The reality is less dramatic: life for most people may carry on much as usual – except they will no longer have any sway over the governing of their nation. This is fascinating because the political movements that seem to unhinge New Scientist so much (Trump’s win and Brexit) were the result of asking voters what Read More ›

The Inauguration of Mr Trump as US President has led to a telling contrast of three marches: The media have given splash coverage to the second march, and had to at least report on the first. Tellingly, predictably, the third — an annual march in defense of life — will receive little coverage, and that will be overwhelmingly hostile. (Notice this street level video of the second march — and no I am not endorsing Mr Jones et al or agreeing with much of what he says. But, his interaction documents the mindset of the marchers all too tellingly. Forgive the coarse slang reference in the video’s title, it is a measure of where our civilisation has reached — yes, Read More ›

Back in November of last year, I published a post announcing a new ID blog I was working on. This post is to let UD readers know that I have now put the blog online. Do pop in and have a look around! There isn’t much material to look at yet, though there are a few static pages with further information on, that may be of interest. I will be adding additional pages and will begin putting a few articles up shortly. I will be highlighting some of the main pages in turn also. Please do head over and let me know what you think of the look etc. either here or on my page. I would appreciate the feedback. Read More ›

Relevant to that point, what proportion of the total are they? From a survey at philpapers: on where philosophers stand on stuff like God, free will, etc: Free will: compatibilism, libertarianism, or no free will? Accept or lean toward: compatibilism 550 / 931 (59.1%) Other 139 / 931 (14.9%) Accept or lean toward: libertarianism 128 / 931 (13.7%) Accept or lean toward: no free will 114 / 931 (12.2%) God: theism or atheism? Accept or lean toward: atheism 678 / 931 (72.8%) Accept or lean toward: theism 136 / 931 (14.6%) Other 117 / 931 (12.6%) A friend notes that out of 931 target faculty 49.8% accepting or lean toward naturalism, and 25.8% accepting or leaning toward non-naturalism. Another friend Read More ›

Not just dumping on it. We get mail, only some of which we can quote*: At a recent alt-right meet up in Boston, a number of young alt-righters noted how they’ve given up on Christianity and have converted to neo-paganism (Asatru Folk Assembly). Their complaints about Christianity were as follows: … You have literal cuckolds adopting blacks and you have weak girly men crying about the need not to deport 3rd world invaders. This religion, they maintain, is a disgrace for any man with a healthy testosterone level.” … What happened? One professor of evolutionary psychology and religion, in a forthcoming book, argues that mainstream Christianity has been overtaken by girly men. It’s undergone a selection process where more manly Read More ›

At Algemeiner: Question: I’m a little confused here. You have said repeatedly in this lecture and in other lectures, and in your books, that we haven’t the slightest clue how life began. In fact, Christian de Duve himself has stated explicitly that we have no idea how life began. How, then, can he declare that “life is a cosmic imperative?” There is no scientific evidence for that declaration. Answer: Yes, you are correct. However, de Duve and many others like him feel that the odds of life’s starting by chance are so outrageously improbable that it would be irrational even to consider such a possibility. What makes the problem even more difficult is that life would be absurdly improbable even Read More ›

At BioLogos, historian Ted Davis offers: Perhaps the greatest irony about the contemporary religion-science dialogue is the fact that, despite their own strongly articulated denials, many thinkers implicitly accept the “warfare” thesis of A. D. White—that is, they agree with White that traditional theology has proved unable to engage science in fruitful conversation. More than most others, John Polkinghorne understands just how badly White misread the history of Christianity and science, and how much theology has been impoverished by its failure to challenge this core assumption of modernity. … Nothing was more important to many modernists than the God they found within the evolutionary process itself, rather than in putative explanatory gaps in that process. What might be missed, however, Read More ›