Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Darwinism: Evolution faster on warmer Earth?

arroba Email

From ScienceDaily:

Early life forms on Earth are likely to have mutated and evolved at much higher rates than they do today, suggests a new analysis from researchers at the University of North Carolina.

In a study published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Richard Wolfenden, PhD, and his colleagues found that the rate of a certain chemical change in DNA — a key driver of organisms’ spontaneous mutation rates and thus of evolution’s pace — increases extremely rapidly with temperature. Combining that finding with recent evidence that life arose when our planet was much warmer than it is now, the scientists concluded that the rate of spontaneous mutation was at least 4,000 times higher than it is today.

“At the higher temperatures that seem to have prevailed during the early phase of life, evolution was shaking the dice frantically,” said Wolfenden, Alumni Distinguished Professor of Biochemistry and Biophysics at the UNC School of Medicine.

A much faster pace of evolution means that species could have proliferated much more rapidly than they do now, affording the flora and fauna of Earth ample time to acquire their enormous diversity and complexity. More.

Yet another effort to defend Darwinism? The idea seems to be that spontaneous mutation produces information, but it does not. That would be like shaking the jigsaw puzzle more frantically and expecting more order to result. See Data basic

See also: Convergence: Venom in fish evolved 18 times The fact that these “super complicated” systems evolved eighteen different times pretty much rules out a Darwinian origin (natural selection acting on random mutation).

Follow UD News at Twitter!

My sentiments exactly Andre! Hooray for global warming! It's gotta be a good thing if it speeds up evolution. tjguy
Clearly global warming is a good thing. Andre
Funny how this science, in all its authority comes up with these "suggest(ion)s". And all that authority to impress the little people with what "could have" happened or was "likely". more phrases to add to the infinitely numerous "may have been", "might have occurred", "probably acquired", and of course the ole' standard "evolved" that after a few decades worth starts one thinking about the propaganda being spoon fed said little people. And not saying us little people are so smart, but we do notice that what "could have" back 40 years ago never seems to get demonstrated. groovamos
Also of note, the materialistic assumption that life is, to use Zimmer's words, 'barely constrained randomness',,,
Flailing Blindly: The Pseudoscience of Josh Rosenau and Carl Zimmer - Jonathan Wells April 17, 2014 Excerpt: this time the kinesin's movements are characterized (in Zimmer's words) by "barely constrained randomness.,,," http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/04/flailing_blindl084521.html
That materialistic assumption of 'barely constrained randomness', or 'thermodynamic jostling', at the root of life is now known to be a wrong (materialistic) assumption. The random 'thermodynamic jostling' within the cell is, contrary to materialistic assumptions, now known to be tightly constrained: In the following paper, finding a lack of 'random collisions' in a (very) crowded cell was a 'counterintuitive surprise' for the researchers:
Proteins put up with the roar of the crowd - June 23, 2016 Excerpt: It gets mighty crowded around your DNA, but don't worry: According to Rice University researchers, your proteins are nimble enough to find what they need. Rice theoretical scientists studying the mechanisms of protein-DNA interactions in live cells showed that crowding in cells doesn't hamper protein binding as much as they thought it did.,,, If DNA can be likened to a library, it surely is a busy one. Molecules roam everywhere, floating in the cytoplasm and sticking to the tightly wound double helix. "People know that almost 90 percent of DNA is covered with proteins, such as polymerases, nucleosomes that compact two meters into one micron, and other protein molecules," Kolomeisky said.,,, That makes it seem that proteins sliding along the strand would have a tough time binding, and it's possible they sometimes get blocked. But the Rice team's theory and simulations indicated that crowding agents usually move just as rapidly, sprinting out of the way. "If they move at the same speed, the molecules don't bother each other," Kolomeisky said. "Even if they're covering a region, the blockers move away quickly so your protein can bind." In previous research, the team determined that stationary obstacles sometimes help quicken a protein's search for its target by limiting options. This time, the researchers sought to define how crowding both along DNA and in the cytoplasm influenced the process. "We may think everything's fixed and frozen in cells, but it's not," Kolomeisky said. "Everything is moving.",,, Floating proteins appear to find their targets quickly as well. "This was a surprise," he said. "It's counterintuitive, because one would think collisions between a protein and other molecules on DNA would slow it down. But the system is so dynamic (and so well designed?), it doesn't appear to be an issue." http://phys.org/news/2016-06-proteins-roar-crowd.html
The reason why there is far less 'thermodynamic jostling', or random collisions, in a cell than was presupposed in Darwinian thought is because life runs on quantum principles not on the classical materialistic principles as was presupposed by Darwinists:
Molecular Biology - 19th Century Materialism meets 21st Century Quantum Mechanics - video https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/vb.100000088262100/1141908409155424/?type=2&theater Jim Al-Khalili, at the 2:30 minute mark of the following video states, ",,and Physicists and Chemists have had a long time to try and get use to it (Quantum Mechanics). Biologists, on the other hand have got off lightly in my view. They are very happy with their balls and sticks models of molecules. The balls are the atoms. The sticks are the bonds between the atoms. And when they can't build them physically in the lab nowadays they have very powerful computers that will simulate a huge molecule.,, It doesn't really require much in the way of quantum mechanics in the way to explain it." At the 6:52 minute mark of the video, Jim Al-Khalili goes on to state: “To paraphrase, (Erwin Schrödinger in his book “What Is Life”), he says at the molecular level living organisms have a certain order. A structure to them that’s very different from the random thermodynamic jostling of atoms and molecules in inanimate matter of the same complexity. In fact, living matter seems to behave in its order and its structure just like inanimate cooled down to near absolute zero. Where quantum effects play a very important role. There is something special about the structure, about the order, inside a living cell. So Schrodinger speculated that maybe quantum mechanics plays a role in life”. Jim Al-Khalili – Quantum biology – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOzCkeTPR3Q
Of supplemental note: Contrary to the overall assumption made in the paper mentioned in the OP, energy must be precisely harnessed to be of any practical use for life.
Fine tuning of Light, Atmosphere, and Water to Photosynthesis (etc..) - video (2016) https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/vb.100000088262100/1136462999699965/?type=2&theater Miniature Molecular Power Plant: ATP Synthase - January 2013 - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XI8m6o0gXDY Your Motor/Generators Are 100% Efficient – October 2011 Excerpt: ATP synthase astounds again. The molecular machine that generates almost all the ATP (molecular “energy pellets”) for all life was examined by Japanese scientists for its thermodynamic efficiency. By applying and measuring load on the top part that synthesizes ATP, they were able to determine that one cannot do better at getting work out of a motor,,, The article was edited by noted Harvard expert on the bacterial flagellum, Howard Berg. http://crev.info/content/111014-your_motor_generators ATP Synthase, an Energy-Generating Rotary Motor Engine - Jonathan M. May 15, 2013 Excerpt: ATP synthase has been described as "a splendid molecular machine," and "one of the most beautiful" of "all enzymes" .,, "bona fide rotary dynamo machine",,, If such a unique and brilliantly engineered nanomachine bears such a strong resemblance to the engineering of manmade hydroelectric generators, and yet so impressively outperforms the best human technology in terms of speed and efficiency, one is led unsurprisingly to the conclusion that such a machine itself is best explained by intelligent design. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/05/atp_synthase_an_1072101.html
They claim that as early as 4.1 billion years ago,,,
Early life forms on Earth are likely to have mutated and evolved at much higher rates than they do today,,,, spontaneous mutation was at least 4,000 times higher than it is today.
So, since random mutations are the supposed fodder that natural selection creates all life out of, should not bacteria evolve up to 4,000 times faster than they do today? Yet, bacteria have stayed basically the same for billions of years and did not 'evolve at much higher rates' until, supposedly, the Cambrian explosion billions of years later:
Cambrian Explosion Ruins Darwin’s Tree of Life (2 minutes in 24 hour day) – video (2:55 minute mark) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vA2LDiWeWb4
Should there not be at least some empirical support for a theoretical claim before it is published? The facts are, contrary to the Darwinian claims in this paper, that for as far back as we can look, we find no evidence of bacteria ever evolving from, or to, anything:
When did oxygenic photosynthesis evolve? - Roger Buick - 2008 Excerpt:,, U–Pb data from ca 3.8?Ga metasediments suggest that this metabolism could have arisen by the start of the geological record. Hence, the hypothesis that oxygenic photosynthesis evolved well before the atmosphere became permanently oxygenated seems well supported. http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/363/1504/2731.long Static evolution: is pond scum the same now as billions of years ago? Excerpt: But what intrigues (paleo-biologist) J. William Schopf most is lack of change. Schopf was struck 30 years ago by the apparent similarities between some 1-billion-year-old fossils of blue-green bacteria and their modern microbial counterparts. "They surprisingly looked exactly like modern species," Schopf recalls. Now, after comparing data from throughout the world, Schopf and others have concluded that modern pond scum differs little from the ancient blue-greens. "This similarity in morphology is widespread among fossils of [varying] times," says Schopf. As evidence, he cites the 3,000 such fossils found; per free library The Paradox of the "Ancient" (250 Million Year Old) Bacterium Which Contains "Modern" Protein-Coding Genes: Heather Maughan*, C. William Birky Jr., Wayne L. Nicholson, William D. Rosenzweig§ and Russell H. Vreeland ; “Almost without exception, bacteria isolated from ancient material have proven to closely resemble modern bacteria at both morphological and molecular levels.” http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/19/9/1637 Scientists discover organism that hasn't evolved in more than 2 billion years - February 3, 2015 Excerpt: Using cutting-edge technology, they found that the bacteria look the same as bacteria of the same region from 2.3 billion years ago -- and that both sets of ancient bacteria are indistinguishable from modern sulfur bacteria found in mud off of the coast of Chile. per science daily Organisms Refusing to Evolve Over Millions of Years - January 15, 2016 Excerpt: The team conducted multiple tests on the mats and the microbes found hidden under them, including bulk carbon and SEM analysis and Raman micro-spectroscopy and report that the microbes were shaped like rods, growing in train like filaments, similar to many bacteria alive today. They note also that the microbes were quite uniform in shape and that they were able to control their diameter and length as modern microbes do. The fossils are also approximately 500 million years older than any other previous fossil found in a habitat, and thus represent some of the earliest forms of life ever found (the very earliest date back to approximately 3.43 billion years ago.) per crev.info Geobiologist Noffke Reports Signs of Life that Are 3.48 Billion Years Old - 11/11/13 Excerpt: the mats woven of tiny microbes we see today covering tidal flats were also present as life was beginning on Earth. The mats, which are colonies of cyanobacteria, can cause unusual textures and formations in the sand beneath them. Noffke has identified 17 main groups of such textures caused by present-day microbial mats, and has found corresponding structures in geological formations dating back through the ages. http://www.odu.edu/about/odu-publications/insideodu/2013/11/11/topstory1 Scientists find signs of life in Australia dating back 3.48 billion years - Thu November 14, 2013 Excerpt: “We conclude that the MISS in the Dresser Formation record a complex microbial ecosystem, hitherto unknown, and represent one of the most ancient signs of life on Earth.”... “this MISS displays the same associations that are known from modern as well as fossil” finds. The MISS also shows microbes that act like “modern cyanobacteria,” http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/13/world/asia/australia-ancient-life/
Moreover, just pouring raw energy into a system (heat in this instance) actually increases the disorder (entropy) of the system and does nothing to alleviate the 'information enigma'. In other words, heat, since it increases disorder, actually makes the situation worse for Darwinists, not better.
Thermodynamic Arguments for Creation - Thomas Kindell (46:39 minute mark) - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1yto0-z2bQ&feature=player_detailpage#t=2799 Rob Sheldon on new origin of life theory: Testimony to power of self-promotion? - January 24, 2014 Excerpt: The problem, as physicists will only tell you behind a closed and locked door, is that life violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics. If you throw some water and amino acids and sugar on the stove and simmer it for a few days, you might get great soup, but you surely will not get a single ounce of help writing your next research grant. The reason is that the soup uses all that heat and water and convection to find the highest entropy possible at the given energy. In the reductionist “ideal gas” model, this is a Gaussian distribution of velocities known as a Maxwellian, and it is about as boring as it gets. - Rob Sheldon - PhD. Physics https://uncommondesc.wpengine.com/origin-of-life/rob-sheldon-on-new-origin-of-life-theory-testimony-to-power-of-self-promotion/ “Gain in entropy always means loss of information, and nothing more.” Gilbert Newton Lewis – preeminent Chemist of the first half of last century

Leave a Reply