PaV

In a previous post, I indicated that Dr. Frances Arnold’s Nobel Prize in Chemistry points out that Artificial Selection is more powerful a force than Natural Selection. In a new paper, the authors show that the idea of the ‘gradual’ evolution of foraminifera turns out to be wrong and that what actually happens is an “abrupt” evolution. Neogene planktonic foraminiferal fossil lineages have been used to interpret gradualism (Arnold, 1983; Belyea and Thunell, 1984; Wei, 1987; Wei and Kennett, 1988), PE (Wei and Kennett, 1988), and punctuated anagenesis (Malmgren et al., 1983, 1996). However, the last decade has seen the emergence of sophisticated model-fitting techniques for time series that are ideal tools for testing the evolutionary tempo and mode (Hunt, Read More ›

There’s been quite a lot of conversation about our three newest recepients of the Nobel Prize in chemistry, partially, if not principally, because one of the three was a woman, Dr. Francis Arnold. We’ve also read that Dr. Arnold, having gotten nowhere using “rational design” then turned to “evolution,” and with this switch in methodology went on to win the Nobel. Here’s the NYT’s article where we read such things. Let me quote a section which illustrates what is being implied: At first, Dr. Arnold attempted “rational design,” employing logic and knowledge of how proteins function to try to build new enzymes — proteins that act as catalysts for chemical reactions. But enzymes are large, complicated molecules — some consisting Read More ›

Here’s a new paper form Nature Communications describing a discovery of a new geometric shape that is apparently found only in curved epithelial cells. I find it intriguing that this shape is entirely new, not found elsewhere in nature, but now coined “scutoids” by the authors, and is proposed as making “possible the minimization of the tissue energy and stabilize three-dimensional packing.” From the abstract: “The detailed analysis of diverse tissues confirms that generation of apico-basal intercalations between cells is a common feature during morphogenesis. Using biophysical arguments, we propose that scutoids make possible the minimization of the tissue energy and stabilize three-dimensional packing. Hence, we conclude that scutoids are one of nature’s solutions to achieve epithelial bending. Our findings Read More ›

There’s a paper out in Nature Genetics discussing “chromatin topology.” Here’s the abstract: A long-standing question in gene regulation is how remote enhancers communicate with their target promoters, and specifically how chromatin topology dynamically relates to gene activation. Here, we combine genome editing and multi-color live imaging to simultaneously visualize physical enhancer–promoter interaction and transcription at the single-cell level in Drosophila embryos. By examining transcriptional activation of a reporter by the endogenous even-skipped enhancers, which are located 150 kb away, we identify three distinct topological conformation states and measure their transition kinetics. We show that sustained proximity of the enhancer to its target is required for activation. Transcription in turn affects the three-dimensional topology as it enhances the temporal stability of Read More ›

From PhysOrg this morning, in a study using “DNA bar-codes” (mitochondrial DNA, using a specific gene COI) and conducted around the world, here’s the verdict: The study’s most startling result, perhaps, is that nine out of 10 species on Earth today, including humans, came into being 100,000 to 200,000 years ago. “This conclusion is very surprising, and I fought against it as hard as I could,” Thaler told AFP. The scientists can’t figure out what might have caused this. They ask: Was there some catastrophic event 200,000 years ago that nearly wiped the slate clean? Maybe a “flood”? About “bar-codes” there’s this: On the one hand, the COI gene sequence is similar across all animals, making it easy to pick Read More ›

Here’s a recent paper dealing with the deadly and devastating hurricane Harvey which hit the Gulf last year. I haven’t looked at very much of the paper; however, their basic take on it is that the ferocious effects of Harvey can be explained by the OHC (Ocean Heat Content) of the Gulf’s surface waters. And, of course, they want to blame ‘global warming’ (oh heavens, I should have said “climate change”). You know, more CO2 in the upper atmosphere reflects escaping heat energy back onto the ocean’s surface, causing more water vapor–the real culprit in ‘global warming.’ So, I simply invite you to look at Figure 1 (p 36). You will notice that the OHC calculated for ocean depths between Read More ›

At Phys.Org there’s a press release that talks about how “information” can be “hidden” in plain text. They use some kind of ‘perturbation’ method, which, I suspect is linked to some kind of set of statistics. Here’s what they say: Computer scientists at Columbia Engineering have invented FontCode, a new way to embed hidden information in ordinary text by imperceptibly changing, or perturbing, the shapes of fonts in text. FontCode creates font perturbations, using them to encode a message that can later be decoded to recover the message. . . . “While there are obvious applications for espionage, we think FontCode has even more practical uses for companies wanting to prevent document tampering or protect copyrights, and for retailers and Read More ›

I wonder what you make of this “Keeling Curve.” I especially wonder what you make of the inset–which can be seen to oscillate on the actual graph of this ‘curve’ below the inset. This might be a very teachable moment. I await your brilliant responses.

For those of us who have been critiquing evolutionary theory for a long time, and hence, long-time observers of the kind of reasoning evolutionists/Darwinists employ, you can’t help but see the absolute parallel that exists between evolutionary theory and the “science” behind “global warming.” [N.B. If you have to change the name of the ‘science’ from “global warming” to “climate change,” then just admit you’ve lost the argument, else why change the very name you use?.] Both involve ‘consensus’ thinking; both involve criteria that used in one manner provide a solution given ONE SET of facts, but which, given a new, different, and conflicting set of facts, are used in almost the opposite manner; both involve an almost faith-like allegiance Read More ›

A compound eye from the Cambrian Period showed up in a fossil. Here’s what the PR has to say: Professor Euan Clarkson, of the University of Edinburgh’s School of GeoSciences, said: “This exceptional fossil shows us how early animals saw the world around them hundreds of millions of years ago. Remarkably, it also reveals that the structure and function of compound eyes has barely changed in half a billion years.” Professor Brigitte Schoenemann, of the University of Cologne, said: “This may be the earliest example of an eye that it is possible to find. Older specimens in sediment layers below this fossil contain only traces of the original animals, which were too soft to be fossilised and have disintegrated over Read More ›

Over at the The Skeptical Zone there’s a reference to a post from Larry Moran’s blogsite. The question of irreducible complexity is revisited, and, torn to shreds in the eyes of evolutionary thinkers. For them it seems sufficient to simply announce the “presence” of some needed ingredient of the putative IC system of proteins in order to debunk IC claims. For them, having identified certain portions of the needed complex somewhere else, and understanding this to be a part of the genetic tool box available to all because of common descent, is enough to make them feel they have satisfactorily undermined the latest attempt at identifying IC systems. That’s where the Ralph’s Supermarket comes in. Here’s what I mean: Let’s Read More ›

Here’s the abstract of a new PNAS article: There’s a new article in PNAS that illustrates the fact that thermodynamics determines the effects of future changes made to a protein molecule. Any one mutation changes the thermodynamic/statistical mechanics of the protein molecule. And these changes in the thermodynamic properties swims around in a giant ocean of statistical possibilities, and consequent improbabilities; so much so, that future mutations following upon any given mutation cannot be ascertained. So, the next time you hear about how they were able to “reconstruct” an ancient protein, allowing the determination of possible pathways, don’t pay any attention to it. Evolutionary prediction is of deep practical and philosophical importance. Here we show, using a simple computational protein Read More ›

This just in from PhysOrg: We had no idea that we would discover that transcription factors operated in this clustered way. The textbooks all suggested that single molecules were used to switch genes on and off, not these crazy nano footballs that we observed.” The team believe the clustering process is due to an ingenious strategy of the cell to allow transcription factors to reach their target genes as quickly as possible. Professor Leake said: “We found out that the size of these nano footballs is a remarkably close match to the gaps between DNA when it is scrunched up inside a cell. As the DNA inside a nucleus is really squeezed in, you get little gaps between separate strands Read More ›

The dating of human origins seems, at times, to be all over the place. However, the one constant appears to be an increasingly older dating of the split between humans and apes. This is bad for Darinian theory since the incredible differences between humans and chimpanzees, i.e., our consciousness, not to mention just the physiological differences, have less and less time to arise via ‘gradualism.’ E.g., some date the divergence between chimps and gorillas at only 8 1/2 million years ago (mya), while the split between chimps and humans had to have occurred, according to this new finding, at least 7 1/2 mya. One million years to bring about the immense differences between chimps and humans? Quite a problem. Here’s Read More ›

One mutation at a time. No need for simultaneous mutations (since the mathematics verges on impossibility). But, maybe, by gosh, we do need those “simultaneous mutations.” Here’s the abstract from Nature of an article where MCT (micro-computed tomography) reveals the ‘innards’ of a primary fossil. Just read it, and you’ll get the notion of how modern science is simply eviscerating Darwinism. Phylogenetic analysis of early tetrapod evolution has resulted in a consensus across diverse data sets in which the tetrapod stem group is a relatively homogenous collection of medium- to large-sized animals showing a progressive loss of ‘fish’ characters as they become increasingly terrestrial, whereas the crown group demonstrates marked morphological diversity and disparity. The oldest fossil attributed to the Read More ›