That Conference On The Evolution of Multicellularity Revealed The Usual Problems

5 Replies to “That Conference On The Evolution of Multicellularity Revealed The Usual Problems”

1. 1
   bornagain77 says:

   December 25, 2013 at 5:59 am

   A few notes: There simply isn’t any evidence in the fossil record indicating that single cells have ever formed anything other than ‘simple aggregates’:

   “We go from single cell protozoa. which would be amoeba and things like that. Then you get into some that are a little bit bigger, still single cell, and then you get aggregates, they’re still individual cells that aggregate together. They don’t seem to have much in the way of cooperation,,, but when you really talk about a functioning organism, that has more than just one type of cell, you are talking about a sponge and you can have hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of cells. So we don’t really have organisms that function with say two different types of cells, but there is only five total. We don’t have anything like that.”
   – Dr. Raymond G. Bohlin – quote taken from 31:00 minute mark of this following video
   Natural Limits to Biological Change 2/2 – video
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vo3OKSGeFRQ

   Challenging Fossil of a Little Fish
   Excerpt: “I think this is a major mystery in paleontology,” said Chen. “Before the Cambrian, we should see a number of steps: differentiation of cells, differentiation of tissue, of dorsal and ventral, right and left. But we don’t have strong evidence for any of these.” Taiwanese biologist Li was also direct: “No evolution theory can explain these kinds of phenomena.”
   http://www.fredheeren.com/boston.htm

   Instant Body Plans: The Case of Jellyfish – July 26, 2013
   Excerpt: Cubomedusae (box jellyfish) are particularly interesting. They have eyes that are almost human-like! “As the name depicts, Cubozoans have a squarish shape with four tentacles and four rhopalia. Each rhopalium contains six eyes of four different types, two of which (the upper lens eye and the lower lens eye) are highly developed image-forming eyes with cornea, pupil, lens, and retina, much like our own….”
   “The earliest widely accepted animal fossils are rather modern-looking cnidarians, possibly from around 580 million years ago, although fossils from the Doushantuo Formation can only be dated approximately.” So it’s not clear that the dates are right, but even if they precede the main (Cambrian) explosion by 40 million years, they are already “modern-looking.”
   http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....74861.html

   As well, Darwinists simply have no experimental evidence to suggest that such a transition from single cell aggregates to a multicellular organism is even possible.

   More Darwinian Degradation – M. Behe – January 2012
   Excerpt: Recently a paper appeared by Ratcliff et al. (2012) entitled “Experimental evolution of mulitcellularity” and received a fair amount of press attention, including a story in the New York Times.,,, It seems to me that Richard Lenski, who knows how to get the most publicity out of exceedingly modest laboratory results, has taught his student well. In fact, the results can be regarded as the loss of two pre-existing abilities: 1) the loss of the ability to separate from the mother cell during cell division; and 2) the loss of control of apoptosis.
   http://behe.uncommondescent.co.....gradation/

   “The likelihood of developing two binding sites in a protein complex would be the square of the probability of developing one: a double CCC (chloroquine complexity cluster), 10^20 times 10^20, which is 10^40. There have likely been fewer than 10^40 cells in the entire world in the past 4 billion years, so the odds are against a single event of this variety (just 2 binding sites being generated by accident) in the history of life. It is biologically unreasonable.”
   Michael J. Behe PhD. (from page 146 of his book “Edge of Evolution”)

   And yet, Dr. Behe, on the important Table 7.1 on page 143 of Edge Of Evolution, finds that a typical ‘simple’ single cell might have some 10,000 protein-binding sites. Whereas a conservative estimate for protein-protein binding sites for a multicellular creature is found to be,,,

   Largest-Ever Map of Plant Protein Interactions – July 2011
   Excerpt: The new map of 6,205 protein partnerings represents only about two percent of the full protein- protein “interactome” for Arabidopsis, since the screening test covered only a third of all Arabidopsis proteins, and wasn’t sensitive enough to detect many weaker protein interactions. “There will be larger maps after this one,” says Ecker.
   http://www.sciencedaily.com/re.....144936.htm

   So taking into account that they only covered 2% of the full protein-protein “interactome”, then that gives us a number, for different protein-protein interactions, of 310,000. Thus, from my very rough, and very conservative, ‘back of the envelope’ calculations, we find that this is at least 30 times higher than Dr. Behe’s estimate of 10,000 different protein-protein binding sites for a typical single cell (Page 143; Edge of Evolution; Behe). Therefore, at least at first glance from my very rough calculations, it certainly appears to be a impossible step that evolution must somehow make, by purely unguided processes, to go from a ‘simple’ single cell to a multi-cellular creature.

   As well, Dr Hunter, as he mentioned in this article, points out that this ‘miracle’ of multicellularity must have happened many different times:

   “That is nowhere more true than with the miracle of multicellularity which, if evolution is true, must have independently evolved more than, err, twenty-five times.”
   Dr. Hunter

   Brown Algae and The Serendipity of Multicellularity – Cornelius Hunter – June 2010
   Excerpt: Instead of the expectation that multicellularity arose once and then proliferated, evolutionists now must say it arose independently several times. And instead of a sort of primitive multicellularity emerging and then undergoing evolutionary refinement, we must believe evolution first produced profoundly unlikely molecular machines, which then in turn enabled multicellularity.
   http://www.uncommondescent.com.....llularity/

   Moreover, as if explaining the origination of just one body plan was not problematic enough for Darwinists, Jellyfish are found to undergo ‘complete metamorphosis’, (as do many other creatures in the Cambrian era), in which two different, and distinct, body plans are utilized within the life cycle of the Jellyfish:

   Do Jellyfish go through complete metamorphosis?
   Yes, it looks different every stage of it’s life. Jellyfishes go through 2 stages. The polyp stage, then the medusae stage. When a jellyfish is a fertilized egg, it is called planula. When the planula is released from the pouches of the jellyfish’s tentacles, it will swim to the bottom of the ocean, attach itself, and start growing. This is known as the polyp stage. Then it will start “budding” and separate. The separated part would then grow into a jellyfish, which is known as the medusae stage.
   http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_j.....s?#slide=2

   The Enigma of Metamorphosis Is Hardly Limited to Butterflies – October 2011
   Excerpt: Even more mysteriously, it appears that the most ancient phyla were metamorphic from the beginning, based on the few larval forms that have been preserved. This suggests that these Cambrian animals had not one but two or more developmental stages at the outset,,,,
   http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....51541.html

   Metamorphosis Is Widespread – Ann Gauger – video
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkD-jd1imaI
2. 2
   bornagain77 says:

   December 25, 2013 at 6:00 am

   Metamorphosis simply does not easily comport to any reasonable Darwinian explanation:

   A Mathematician Explains the Irreducible Complexity of Metamorphosis – November 2011
   Excerpt: Now we are not talking about climbing Mount Improbable, we are talking about building a bridge across an enormous chasm, between caterpillar and butterfly. ,, Until construction of this extremely long and complicated bridge is almost complete, it is a bridge to nowhere. Unless a butterfly (or another organism capable of reproduction) comes out at the end, the chrysalis only serves as a casket for the caterpillar, which cannot reproduce. Now we do not have to simply imagine uses for not-quite-watertight vacuum chamber traps, we have to imagine a selective advantage for committing suicide before you are able to reproduce, and that is a more difficult challenge!
   http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....52461.html

   From Discovering Intelligent Design: My How You’ve Changed – May 26, 2013
   Excerpt: Holometabolism (complete metamorphosis) is the most common and complicated form of insect maturation. The diverse group that undergoes this type of process includes butterflies, moths, beetles, fleas, bees, ants, and many kinds of flies.,,,
   It is exceedingly difficult to understand the origin of holometabolism in Darwinian evolutionary terms. Neither the larval nor the pupal stage is capable of reproduction — only the adult is. In particular, the pupal stage is an all-or nothing proposition. It must complete the process and become an adult, or it will die without ever reproducing.
   The liquefied organism must be completely rebuilt. For this to occur, large amounts of information — encoding the larval body plan, the mechanisms of transformation during metamorphosis, and the adult body plan — must exist before the larva enters this stage. An organism could not survive complete metamorphosis unless the entire process was fully programmed from the beginning. Such a large jump in complexity requires forethought and planning — things that don’t exist in Darwinian evolution. As one evolutionary entomologist acknowledges:
   “… the biggest head-scratcher in evolutionary biology would have to be the origin of the holometabolous insect larva.”
   http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....72521.html

   Verse and Music:

   Genesis 1:20
   Then God said, “Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures,”,,,

   THE GREATEST GIFT – Yancy – music video
   http://www.worshiphousemedia.c.....atest-Gift
3. 3
   Jaceli123 says:

   December 25, 2013 at 8:26 am

   @bornagain77 speaking of fossil evidence I started studying the updated phylogenetic tree from this website here. Another good source of all evolutionists claims:
   http://reptileevolution.com/index.htm
   It has a new updated phylogenetic tree that I can laugh at and fossils that don’t even go in any order of sequence!
4. 4
   KRock says:

   December 25, 2013 at 8:57 am

   Merry Christmas to all. The work you guys are doing at UD, is “outstanding.” I look forward to a new year of brilliantly written articles… as well as learning about all the new discoveries and advancements in science that continue to loosen the grip of Neo Darwinism.

   All the best.
5. 5
   LarTanner says:

   December 26, 2013 at 3:00 pm

   Krock,

   I look forward to a new year of brilliantly written articles… as well as learning about all the new discoveries and advancements in science that continue to loosen the grip of Neo Darwinism.

   Just curious: for 2013, what for you are the top examples of “new discoveries and advancements in science that continue to loosen the grip of Neo Darwinism”?

   For everyone else, I’d like to start a pool: what year will we finally see NeoDarwinism’s cold, arthritic hand loosed entirely off of whatever it’s holding (wink)? What event will trigger it?

   I want to take 2022, please. The key event will be proof that Origin of Species was actually written as a clever ruse by Laurence Sterne.