A new paper in Nature reports on the discovery of a fossil revealing one of the world’s earliest nervous system and limbs used for feeding. Reports the abstract, The organization of the head provides critical data for resolving the phylogenetic relationships and evolutionary history of extinct and extant euarthropods. The early Cambrian-period fuxianhuiids are regarded as basal representatives of stem-group Euarthropoda, and their anterior morphology therefore offers key insights for reconstructing the ancestral condition of the euarthropod head. However, the paired post-antennal structures in Fuxianhuia protensa remain controversial; they have been interpreted as both ‘great appendages’ and as gut diverticulae. Here we describe Chengjiangocaris kunmingensis sp. nov. andFuxianhuia xiaoshibaensis sp. nov. from a new early Cambrian (Stage 3) fossil Lagerstätte in Yunnan, China. Numerous specimens of both species Read More ›

Professor James M. Tour, who is one of the ten most cited chemists in the world, has been publicly criticized for forthrightly declaring in an online essay that while microevolution (or small changes within a species) is well-understood by scientists, there is no scientist alive today who understands how macroevolution is supposed to work, at a chemical level: “I do have scientific problems understanding macroevolution as it is usually presented. I simply can not accept it as unreservedly as many of my scientist colleagues do, although I sincerely respect them as scientists. Some of them seem to have little trouble embracing many of evolution’s proposals based upon (or in spite of) archeological, mathematical, biochemical and astrophysical suggestions and evidence, and Read More ›

People who love the countryside and open places tend to value biodiversity and rich ecosystems. There is a perception that a high species diversity helps to stabilise ecosystems by buffering the effects of environmental change, and in addition create ecosystems with greater functionality. According to MacDougall et al. (2013), “Biodiversity can stabilize ecological systems by functional complementarity, with different species thriving under different conditions.” However, scientific underpinning has lagged behind tacit knowledge and we are faced with the growth of monocultures in agricultural husbandry and commercial land use. Nevertheless, the situation is changing, and the benefits of biodiversity are being increasingly recognised. Researchers face the problem of complex patterns of human interventions. [snip] The punchline: If we start with evidence Read More ›

More myth telling, this time by a famous Darwinian evolutionary biologist. The clear agenda is that this is a religion to replace other religions. But note in contrast how poorly the story is supported by science. Yes, we observe that humans are complex social creatures. We also observe that groups that cooperate best together, do better together than other groups. But this is not evidence for Darwinism, this is the data that needs to be explained by evolution, otherwise Darwinism is not true  (note: here the word ‘Darwinism’ will be used in the popular sense of a grand design-free origin story). What explanation does he give? Multi-level selection. And why do we believe in multi-level selection? Because of overwhelming evidence? Read More ›

An old debate, featuring Dr. Kenneth Miller and Dr. Paul Nelson, has found its way onto YouTube. The debate took place at the time of the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial in Pennsylvania in 2005. Moderated by Sally Satel at the American Enterprise Institute, it focuses on the question of teaching evolutionary theory and intelligent design in science classrooms. Ken Miller’s presentation is predictable: He talks about the type III secretion system and the fusion origin of chromosome 2; about how ID is allegedly nothing more than a negative argument against evolution and really a form of disguised creationism. His arguments have been so thoroughly responded to at ENV and elsewhere that further discussion is unnecessary. I do, however, want to draw attention to a Read More ›

This morning, in the Gonzalez video post comment exchange, I saw where Mung raised a question about how Young Earth Creationists address the Old Cosmos, Old Earth implications of the view raised. I thought it useful to respond briefly, but then the wider connexions surfaced. I would like to stir the pot a bit [–> pl. note the new category], by headlining some sketched out thoughts for consideration, on the mathematical ordering of reality, and related worldviews level philosophical and even theological issues. Indeed, somewhere along the line, the whole project of the validity of a natural theology (and Biblical references to same) crops up as connected to the concerns. Kindly, consider the below scoop-out from my response to Mung Read More ›

Dr Gonzalez — the Astrophysicist half of the Privileged Planet team — recently presented this lecture in which he surveys and briefly, simply explains several key fine tuning cases: Again, useful food for thought. END PS: For more on fine tuning, cf VJT’s recent post on a new form of the inference here, and an introductory one from some time ago, here. (Note, onward linked materials.)

For all you bibliophiles out there, I want to draw your attention to a new book on the Cambrian explosion, by Douglas Erwin and James Valentine. I haven’t read it yet, so I cannot comment on the contents. Carl Zimmer reviews the book here, however, and it appears to have some stunning art work. The book is priced on Amazon at $55.99, although sadly it is not currently available on kindle (so we’ll have to make-do with the hard copy). Purchase your copy here!

Philosophy Professor John T. Roberts, of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, has recently put forward a new version of the fine-tuning argument, entitled, Fine-Tuning and the Infrared Bull’s-Eye (Philosophical Studies 160(2):287-303, 2012). What makes Roberts’ version of the argument particularly interesting is that it is not only much clearer in its formulation than other versions, but also invulnerable to the standard objections that are usually leveled against the fine-tuning argument. As Roberts puts it in the Abstract: I argue that the standard way of formalizing the fine-tuning argument for design is flawed, and I present an alternative formalization. On the alternative formalization, the existence of life is not treated as the evidence that confirms design; instead it is Read More ›

There is no better title for this post than the very title some Darwinists chose for themselves: On the immortality of television sets: “function” in the human genome according to the evolution-free gospel of ENCODE Darwinists are still struggling to come to terms with the idea, from the ENCODE project, that 80% of the genome is functional. Whatever Dawkins now says, according to their model, only about 10% should be subject to natural selection, leaving 70% unexplained. This cannot be! Apparently, ENCODE are to be criticised for using an ‘evolution-free’ definition of function. Yep, you heard that right. You thought that function was function was function, but oh no, you must use a evolution-y definition or you will not get the Read More ›

Most of my readers will not have heard of Joseph McCabe (1867-1955). The atheist Website The Secular Web describes him as follows: One of the giants of not only English atheism, but world atheism, Joseph McCabe left a legacy of aggressive atheist and antireligious literature that remains fresh and insightful today. His many works– he wrote nearly 250 books–could constitute a library of atheism by themselves. Joseph McCabe entered the Franciscan order at the age of 15, and was ordained to the priesthood in 1890, at the age of 22. He was quickly recognized as an outstanding student, and was sent to study at the Catholic University of Louvain for a year (1893-1894). He studied under, and befriended, Cardinal Mercier, Read More ›

One of the great things about UD is the insights that often come up in the comment boxes, by design and inadvertently. And here (at 147 in the Chemist speaks out thread) we have ecs2 responding to the same “he said it” clip I highlighted yesterday. He then continues later in the thread, in response to NM at 150. Let us watch: _________________ NM: >>“Sigh. You really have no idea at all about this stuff, do you? Here’s the issue. Picture, in your head, all 5000 mammal species currently living on the planet. Now think of how many individuals are in each species — some are almost extinct, some have populations of billions. Now think about how each of these Read More ›

This week’s Science carries an interesting article by Maximilian Telford on animal phylogeny, noting many cases of incongruity between trees drawn from morphology and those inferred from molecular studies. Download the article here.