Malevolent Designer News - How a Fungus Makes Its Host Destroy Its Own Brain

Beauveria bassiana on unidentified insect.

© Lisa Bennett (CC-BY 4.0)

Fungus ‘hacks’ natural immune system causing neurodegeneration in fruit flies - University of Birmingham

If we are to believe creationists, their god created insects such as fruit flies, Colorado beetles, etc., and then set about devising ways to kill them with, amongst other pathogens, fungi that infect them and destroy them from inside.

One of the problems this supposedly intelligent designer had to overcome was the immune system it had given the insects in order to protect them from the pathogens it was designing to kill them.

According to an open access paper just published in PLOS Biology by a team led by Professor Alicia Hidalgo from School of Biosciences, The University of Birmingham, one species of parasitic fungus, Beauveria bassiana, cleverly turns its host's immune system against its host, making it destroy its own brain. Although this fungus does not affect mammals, so poses no threat to humans, the team warns that it is possible that another fungus could use a similar technique against mammals, including humans.

Creationism in Crisis - Scientists Are Questioning Human Evolution - But Not In The Way Creationists Had Hoped

Ai-Generated Image (ChatGPT4o)

This article is best read on a laptop, desktop, or tablet

A new model upends the decades-old “hard steps” theory that intelligent life was an incredibly improbable event and suggests that maybe it wasn't all that hard or improbable. The team of researchers said the new interpretation of humanity’s origin increases the probability of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe.

Credit: NASA. All Rights Reserved.

Does planetary evolution favor human-like life? Study ups odds we’re not alone | Penn State University

An interdisciplinary team of astrophysicists and geoscientists has questioned the evolution of a human-like intelligent species. But the question is not about whether, as creationists have been predicting for 50 plus years, but just how easy or difficult was it? That we evolved was never in any doubt.

The relevance of the easy/difficult question is that it affects our calculation of the probability of similar intelligent life evolving on other planets. If each step in its evolution was hard (the 'hard step' model), then we may be alone in the Universe; if easy, then the Universe could be teeming with life.

Unintelligent Design - A Bird-Brained Designer?

Birds Have Developed Complex Brains Independently from Mammals - campusa-magazine - UPV/EHU

You might expect an intelligent designer to use the same solution to the same problem. After all, no intelligent watchmaker would keep reinventing the movement he or she puts in watches. In fact, an expert horologist can look inside a good watch and tell you who make it, not because the maker's name is engraved inside the case but because the same watchmaker will have used the same design over and over again, maybe varying the outward appearance of the watch and adding some functions like date and phases of the moon, but the basic movement will be the same.

And this is how you can tell that whatever designed living organisms was not an intelligent designer, because whatever it is, it keeps designing different solutions to the same problems. For instance, having designed the basic vertebrate nervous system to have a brain at one end and a cord running through the spinal column, it would have used the same starting components when it came to giving some of those vertebrates the intelligence to make tools, solve puzzles and plan ahead.

Not so creationism's intelligent designer.

Like an amnesiac it seems to have forgotten whichever solution it designed first for the three vertebrate orders in which intelligence is to be found - birds, reptiles and mammals. Starting with the ancestral reptilian brain, the design process has produced two different ways of producing the pallium (the part of the brain responsible for cognition, learning and memory recall) in birds and mammals.

Refuting Creationism - A Mass Extinction of Plants Due To Climate Change - 5,000 Years Before 'Creation Week'

Flora and fauna in Siberia at the last glacial maximum

AI-generated image (ChatGPT4o)

Image of Lake Ilirney during field work in Chukotka, Russia

Photo: Alfred Wegener Institute / Luise Schulte.

Single view - AWI

10,000 years or so before creationism's little god created the small flat planet with a dome over it, thinking it was a universe, as described in the creation myth in the Bible, there was a mass extinction due to global climate change. In addition to the loss of the Ice Age megafauna, such as the woolly mammoth, woolly rhinoceros, cave lions, etc. over most of Eurasia and North America when temperatures rose at the end of the last glaciation, we also lost a lot of the Ice Age-adapted plants.

But, because plants tend not to fossilise so readily as the bones of large mammals, we didn't know until now, just how extensive this loss was, and more importantly, what a similar rise in temperatures is going to mean for the extant flora.

To redress this gap, a team of researchers from the Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), Germany, have analysed DNA recovered from plant remains in the sediment of lakes in Siberia and Alaska. In doing so, they have discovered how the temperature affects the way plants interact, tending to support one another in cold weather and competing with one another in warm weather. A rise in ambient temperature meant increasing competition and loss of mutual support.

Refuting Creationism - Where Europeans' Ancestors Came From - Thousands of Years Before 'Creation Week'

Reconstruction of Yamnayan life in the Pontic Area, 5000 years ago

AI-generated image (ChatGPT4o)

Reconstruction of Yamnayan life in the Pontic Area, 5000 years ago.

AI-generated image (ChatGPT4o).

New research based on an analysis of the genomes of 435 individuals has revealed the rich history of the ancestors of modern Europeans, especially the mixing of multiple ethnic groups in the Pontic Area - modern Ukraine - between 8,400 and 4,000 year ago which eventually gave rise to the Yamnaya people who get their name from the Russian for 'pit burial' (Yamna in Ukrainian).

Before the Yamnaya spread into Europe, they were preceded by two earlier waves of migration: firstly, hunter-gatherers who arrived about 45,000 years ago having interbred with and replaced the Neanderthals who had lived there for the previous 250,000 years. These were followed by farmers who came from the Middle East, starting about 9,000 years ago.

The Yamnaya, having formed a stable linguistic and cultural group, and either invented or copied ox-drawn carts and skilled horsemanship, which gave them great mobility, began to expand their range, probably under population pressure beginning about 5,300 years ago and lasting for some 1,800 years, eventually reaching all parts of Western Europe including the Iberian Peninsula and the British Isles.

Malevolent Designer News - How Cancer is Cleverly Designed to Trick Our Immune System

Mitochondrial transfer and metabolic reprogramming of the tumor microenvironment aid cancer immune evasion

Mitochondrial transfer and metabolic reprogramming of the tumor microenvironment aid cancer immune evasion.

How Cancer Cells Trick the Immune System by Altering Mitochondria - Okayama University

There is an ongoing arms race between medical science and cancer - and guess whose side creationism's intelligent designer appears to be on.

Yep, it's the same intelligent designer who designed cancers in the first place by creating an error-prone DNA replication mechanism that goes wrong, as does the error-correction mechanism it designed to try to rectify its faulty design with an added layer of complexity. And one of the results of it going wrong is cancer.

One of the more hopeful treatments for cancer was a tailor-made immunotherapy in which specific antibodies to the cancer cells were used to attack the cancer and treat it like a parasitic pathogen, by training the immune system to recognise the cancer and attack and destroy it.

But, true to form, creationism's divine malevolence has hit back by designing a response by cancer cells to attack by cells of the immune system.

We can be sure this is the work of creationism's intelligent designer because William A Dembski, the Discovery Institute's flunky and pseudoscientist in residence, tells us that any genetic sequence that produces a function must have been given 'specified information' in the form of the DNA that codes for that specific protein because, so he claims, specified information is too complex to have evolved.

Refuting Creationism - Human Cannibalism In Europe - 8,000 Before Creation Week

The entrance to the Maszycka Cave in southern Poland

Photo: Darek Bobak

This article is best read on a laptop, desktop, or tablet

The 18,000-year-old discoveries from the Maszycka Cave include decorated hunting tools made of bone and antler.

Photo: Darek Bobak.

Information for the Media - Georg-August-Universität Göttingen

A good 8,000 years before creationism's little god created the small flat planet with a dome over it as described in Genesis, modern humans were painting wonderful paintings in caves in France and Spain, and cannibalising other humans in what is now southern Poland.

These people were the Magdalenian, a pan-European culture that existed during the Last Glacial Maximum, who are widely regarded as having a form of religion and belief in an afterlife, or at least a spiritual connection to the animals they hunted and depicted on cave walls. However, judging by their cannibalism and casual disposal of human remains along with the bones of the species they hunted for food, and the fact that they decorated and used human bones as utilities such a drinking cups made from human skull caps, they may not have had much regard for the dead.

Creationism Refuted - The Real Universe Shows Us The Bible's Authors Just Make Stuff Up -

Euclid image of a bright Einstein ring around galaxy NGC 6505

Close-up of the Einstein ring around galaxy NGC 6505

ESA - Euclid discovers a stunning Einstein ring

No matter how much you insist that words meant something different in those days, or the description is a poetic allegory or a metaphor the meaning of which is beyond us, the early verses of the Bible clearly and unambiguously describe a universe consisting of a small flat planet with a dome over it with the sun, moon and stars stuck to the underside of the dome.

This, of course, is a childlike description of what the authors saw as they looked up into the sky and saw what looked like a dome, and Earth was more or less flat, give or take a few low hills, so that is what, in their child-like naivety, they described:

How the Bible's authors saw the Universe.

And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

Genesis 1.6-10

---

And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

Genesis 1.14-18

Now, as we learn more about the Universe as we develop increasingly sophisticated scientific instruments for examining it, we discover just how childishly naïve the Bible's authors were and so show to anyone interested in truth that the Bible could not possibly have been written or inspired by the creator god described in it, unless that god wanted to mislead us so that it would take humanity another three thousand years or more to discover its lies - and what would have been the point of that?

Mind you, the same creator god could have told us about germs, atoms or electricity or how to make a steam engine or a motor car, but either chose not to or didn't know about those things, because the people who invented it didn't know about those things either. What 'science' there is in the Bible is no better than the primitive understanding of Bronze Age pastoralists.

Abiogenesis News - Closing Another of Creationism's God-Shaped Gaps - Still No God Found

Formation of polyester protocells under early Earth-like conditions Polyester microdroplets, possible precursors to life, were formed from alpha-hydroxy acids (αHAs) in early Earth-like conditions even at low reaction volume, low reactant concentrations, and/or high NaCl or KCl concentrations.

Credit: Associate Professor Tony Z. Jia

How life’s building blocks took shape on early Earth: the limits of membraneless polyester protocell formation – ELSI｜EARTH-LIFE SCIENCE INSTITUTE

Creationism’ ever-shrinking little god that sits in the abiogenesis gap, just got smaller with the news that researchers led by PhD student Mahendran Sithamparam of the Space Science Center (ANGKASA), Institute of Climate Change, National University of Malaysia, working at the Earth-Life Science Institute (ELSI) in the Institute of Science, Tokyo, Japan, have shown how primitive protocells could have formed under a wide range of realistic probiotic Earth conditions. The research team included scientists from Taiwan and China.

The research showed that membraneless protocells could have formed by polymerization of alpha-hydroxy acids (αHAs) to form polyester microdroplets, not to be confused with the modern plastic polyester. These polymers were polymers of esters - simple organic compounds which are chemically similar to the monomers that make modern polyester fibres.

Tell me all about micro polyester droplets as possible early protocells. Micro polyester droplets have recently been investigated as potential early protocells due to their ability to form spontaneously in prebiotic conditions and exhibit behaviours that mimic some cellular properties. Here’s a detailed breakdown:

1. What Are Micro Polyester Droplets?
   Micro polyester droplets are tiny, membraneless liquid-like structures composed of polyester molecules. Polyesters are a class of polymers that can form via simple condensation reactions between hydroxy acids or polyhydroxy-polycarboxylic acids, which could have been abundant on early Earth.
2. Why Are They of Interest in Protocell Research?
   The origin of life research has long been interested in how early protocells might have formed before the advent of phospholipid membranes. Traditional models include fatty acid vesicles, but recent studies suggest that polymer-based droplets, such as micro polyester droplets, could have played a role. They are particularly interesting because:
   • They **form spontaneously** under plausible prebiotic conditions.
   • They can **sequester biomolecules** like RNA and proteins, potentially aiding primitive metabolism.
   • They exhibit **phase separation**, which allows concentration and compartmentalization of biochemical reactions, a key prerequisite for cellular life.
3. Formation Under Prebiotic Conditions
   Researchers have demonstrated that polyester droplets can form in environments mimicking early Earth. This could occur in:
   • Hydrothermal vents where temperature fluctuations drive condensation reactions.
   • Shallow pools with cycles of wet-dry conditions, which promote polymerization.
   • Areas rich in hydroxy acids, which could be produced abiotically via atmospheric or hydrothermal chemistry.
4. Chemical Properties and Stability
   
   • Polyester droplets are more **chemically robust** than lipid vesicles, which are sensitive to changes in pH and salinity.
   • They are **highly dynamic**, meaning they can fuse, divide, and change size—behaviours reminiscent of primitive cell-like compartments.
   • They can **absorb and concentrate organic molecules**, including amino acids and nucleotides, which could facilitate early biochemical evolution.
5. Relevance to the RNA World Hypothesis
   A major challenge for the RNA world hypothesis is how RNA molecules could have been concentrated and protected from degradation. Micro polyester droplets provide a potential solution:
   • They can **selectively encapsulate RNA**, providing a stable environment for early replication.
   • They offer **compartmentalization**, a crucial step toward molecular evolution and the emergence of self-sustaining reactions.
   • Some studies suggest they could support **primitive metabolic cycles** by allowing localized chemical reactions.
6. Comparison to Other Protocell Models
   
   Feature
   1. Stability
      • Polyester Droplets: High
      • Fatty Acid Vesicles: Moderate
      • Coacervates: High
   2. Formation Ease
      • Polyester Droplets: Simple polymerization
      • Fatty Acid Vesicles: Requires amphiphiles
      • Coacervates: Require charges polymers
   3. RNA Compatibility
      • Polyester Droplets: High
      • Fatty Acids Vesicles: Moderate
      • Coacervates: High
   4. Dynamic Behaviour
      • Polyester Droplets: Yes
      • Fatty Acid Vesicles: Limited
      • Coacervates: Yes
   5. Enclosure of Molecules
      • Polyester Droplets: Strong
      • Fatty Acid Vesicles: Weak
      • Coacervates: Strong
7. Possible Pathways to True Cellular Life
   If micro polyester droplets played a role in early life, they could have eventually given way to more complex protocells by:
   1. Incorporating **primitive catalysts**, such as metal ions or ribozymes, to drive chemical reactions.
   2. Developing **membrane-like structures**, either by merging with lipids or evolving into amphiphilic polymers.
   3. Enabling **genetic material replication**, forming a link between compartmentalization and genetic evolution.
8. Challenges and Open Questions
   
   • How did these droplets transition into more complex cellular structures?
   • Could they catalyse reactions autonomously, or would additional molecules be needed?
   • Were polyester-based protocells widespread, or just one of many competing prebiotic compartments?

Conclusion
Micro polyester droplets present an exciting alternative or complement to traditional lipid-based protocell models. Their ability to encapsulate biomolecules, self-organize, and remain stable under a range of conditions makes them a strong candidate for early protocellular life. Further research into their chemical properties and evolutionary potential could provide deeper insights into life’s origins.

The research findings are published in the American Chemical Society journal ACS Bio & Med Chem Au and are explained in a news release from the Earth Life Science Institute, Tokyo:

How life’s building blocks took shape on early Earth: the limits of membraneless polyester protocell formation

---

New research reveals polyester microdroplets, proposed as model membraneless protocells, formed under a wide range of prebiotic conditions, suggesting these molecules were more widespread than previously thought.

---

One leading theory on the origins of life on Earth proposes that simple chemical molecules gradually became more complex, ultimately forming protocells—primitive, non-living structures that were precursors of modern cells. A promising candidate for protocells is polyester microdroplets, which form through the simple polymerisation of alpha-hydroxy acids (αHAs), compounds believed to have accumulated on early Earth possibly formed by lightning strikes or delivered via meteorites, into protocells, followed by simple rehydration in aqueous medium. A recent study from the Earth-Life Science Institute (ELSI) at Institute of Science Tokyo provides new evidence supporting the formation of polyester microdroplets under a wider range of realistic prebiotic conditions than previously thought.

Led by PhD student Mahendran Sithamparam of the Space Science Center (ANGKASA), Institute of Climate Change, National University of Malaysia as the first author and co-supervised by ELSI’s Specially Appointed Associate Professor Tony Z. Jia and ANGKASA Research Scientist Kuhan Chandru, the study explored the formation of these microdroplets under conditions more reflective of early Earth. The team found that polyester microdroplets could form even in salt-rich environments, at low αHA concentrations, and in small reaction volumes. This expands on previous research, which primarily considered their formation at high concentrations or in larger bodies of water such as coastal areas of lakes or hot springs. The findings suggest instead that polyester protocells were likely more widespread than previously thought, potentially forming in confined spaces like rock pores or even in high-salt environments such as briny pools or oceanic environments.

In 2019, the research team discovered that polyester microdroplets could form through a simple dehydration process. When gently heated to 80°C, phenyllactic acid (PA), a type of αHA, transitioned into a gel-like substance that subsequently formed membraneless droplets when rehydrated. In their latest study, the researchers investigated whether these microdroplets could form under more dilute or lower volume conditions, similar to those expected on prebiotic Earth.

Earlier laboratory tests often used high initial concentrations and volumes of αHAs in the hundreds-of-millimolar or microliter range, respectively, which may not reflect the conditions on prebiotic Earth, where such conditions were unlikely; this is why we needed to push the limits of the polymerisation droplet assembly processes to see whether assembly of such protocells would have actually been viable on early Earth.

Associate Professor Tony Z. Jia, co-corresponding author
Earth-Life Science Institute
Institute of Future Science
Institute of Science Tokyo, Japan.

To simulate these more realistic conditions, the researchers reduced the concentration and volume of PA in synthesis and subsequent droplet formation studies. They found that polyesters could be synthesised and droplets could form with as little as 500 µL of 1 mM PA or 5 µL of 500 mM PA. This suggests that polyester microdroplets could have naturally emerged both in confined spaces, such as rock pores, or dilute environments, such as those following flooding or precipitation.

To further test real-world conditions, the team simulated reactions in salinities resembling those in the ancient ocean. They introduced 1M NaCl, KCl, and MgCl2 to the PA reactants, finding that polyester synthesis and microdroplet assembly could proceed in NaCl and KCl but not in MgCl2. This suggests that polyester microdroplets would have been more likely to form in water bodies with specific salt compositions, such as those high in NaCl and KCl but low in MgCl2, favourable to αHA polymerisation and subsequent polyester microdroplet assembly.

The conclusions of this study clearly show that polyester protocells were likely more common on early Earth than previously thought and also informs the next generation of laboratory studies of the system. Thus, a wide range of primitive environments—including oceanic, freshwater, briny, and confined spaces like rock pores—could have ultimately supported the formation of these protocells both on Earth or elsewhere.

Kuhan Chandru, Co-corresponding author
Space Science Center (ANGKASA)
Institute of Climate Change
National University of Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia.

This research was made possible through the ELSI Visitor Program, which fosters international collaboration involving ELSI researchers; this program supported Sithamparam on two separate visits to ELSI in 2023, as well as a visit during summer 2023 to ELSI for graduate student Ming-Jing He (National Central University) to complete experiments for her master’s thesis. All experiments were conducted at ELSI, and the findings are featured in the ACS Bio & Med Chem Au Special Issue, 2024 Rising Stars in Biological, Medicinal, and Pharmaceutical Chemistry, of which Jia is an awardee.

Reference

Mahendran Sithamparam¹, Rehana Afrin², Navaniswaran Tharumen¹, Ming-Jing He³, Chen Chen⁴, Ruiqin Yi⁵, Po-Hsiang Wang^3,6, Tony Z. Jia^2,7*, and Kuhan Chandru^1,8,9*
Probing the Limits of Reactant Concentration and Volume in Primitive Polyphenyllactate Synthesis and Microdroplet Assembly Processes ACS Bio & Med Chem Au DOI: 10.1021/acsbiomedchemau.4c00082

1. Space Science Center (ANGKASA), Institute of Climate Change, National University of Malaysia, Selangor 43650, Malaysia
2. Earth-Life Science Institute, Institute of Future Science, Institute of Science Tokyo, 2-12-1-IE-1 Ookayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 152-8550, Japan
3. Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Engineering, National Central University, No. 300, Zhongda Rd., Zhongli District, Taoyuan 32001, Taiwan (R.O.C.)
4. Biofunctional Catalyst Research Team, RIKEN Center for Sustainable Resource Science (CSRS), 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan
5. State Key Laboratory of Isotope Geochemistry and CAS Center for Excellence in Deep Earth Science, Guangzhou Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou 510640, China
6. Graduate Institute of Environmental Engineering, National Central University, No. 300, Zhongda Road, Zhongli District, Taoyuan City 320, Taiwan
7. Blue Marble Space Institute of Science, 600 first Ave, Floor 1, Seattle, Washington 98104, United States
8. Polymer Research Center (PORCE), Faculty of Science and Technology, National University of Malaysia, Selangor 43600 Malaysia
9. Institute of Physical Chemistry, CENIDE, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45141 Essen, Germany

*Corresponding authors’ email: tzjia@elsi.jp (Tony Z. Jia) and kuhan@ukm.edu.my (Kuhan Chandru)

Abstract

Polyester microdroplets have been investigated as primitive protocell models that can exhibit relevant primitive functions such as biomolecule segregation, coalescence, and salt uptake. Such microdroplets assemble after dehydration synthesis of alpha-hydroxy acid (αHA) monomers, commonly available on early Earth, via heating at mild temperatures, followed by rehydration in aqueous media. αHAs, in particular, are also ubiquitous in biology, participating in a variety of biochemical processes such as metabolism, suggesting the possible strong link between primitive and modern αHA-based processes. Although some primitive αHA polymerization conditions have been probed previously, including monomer chirality and reaction temperature, relevant factors pertaining to early Earth’s local environmental conditions that would likely affect primitive αHA polymerization are yet to be fully investigated. Hence, probing the entire breadth of possible conditions that could promote primitive αHA polymerization is required to understand the plausibility of polyester microdroplet assembly on early Earth at the origin of life. In particular, there are numerous aqueous environments available on early Earth that could have resulted in varying volumes and concentrations of αHA accumulation, which would have affected subsequent αHA polymerization reactions. Similarly, there were likely varying levels of salt in the various aqueous prebiotic solutions, such as in the ocean, lakes, and small pools, that may have affected primitive reactions. Here, we probe the limits of the dehydration synthesis and subsequent membraneless microdroplet (MMD) assembly of phenyllactic acid (PA), a well-studied αHA relevant to both biology and prebiotic chemistry, with respect to reactant concentration and volume and salinity through mass spectrometry- and microscopy-based observations. Our study showed that polymerization and subsequent microdroplet assembly of PA appear robust even at low reactant concentrations, smaller volumes, and higher salinities than those previously tested. This indicates that PA-polyester and its microdroplets are very much viable under a wide variety of conditions, thus more likely participating in prebiotic chemistries at the origins of life.

Sithamparam, Mahendran; Afrin, Rehana; Tharumen, Navaniswaran; He, Ming-Jing; Chen, Chen; Yi, Ruiqin; Wang, Po-Hsiang; Jia, Tony Z.; Chandru, Kuhan
Probing the Limits of Reactant Concentration and Volume in Primitive Polyphenyllactate Synthesis and Microdroplet Assembly Processes ACS Bio & Med Chem Au; doi: 10.1021/acsbiomedchemau.4c00082.

Copyright: © 2025 The authors.
Published by American Chemical Society. Open access.
Reprinted under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0)

In addition, the first two paragraphs of the team's introduction to their paper should make grim reading for any creationist still deluded enough to believe the absurd nonsense that biomedical scientists are giving up on the Theory of Evolution and instead turning to magical creationism for answers:

Introduction
Abiogenesis describes the chemical evolution of life on early Earth, i.e., the origins of life (OoL), and involves the formation of simple organic molecules, their polymerization and self-assembly into complex molecules, the emergence of protocells, (1−3) and the development of robust Darwinian evolution before or at the onset of the last universal common ancestor (LUCA). (4) In particular, the synthesis of the primitive chemicals potentially leading to life could have taken place in various settings or by various geological processes on early Earth, including Miller–Urey chemistry, (5) hydrothermal vents, (6,7) shallow pools and lakes, (8,9) panspermia delivery, (10) or wet–dry cycles, (11,12) just to name a few, and likely facilitated possible pathways toward several OoL hypotheses, i.e., the lipid-first world, (13) the metabolism-first world, (14) the RNA world, (15) etc. These primitive environments or processes, combined with energy (i.e., lightning strikes; (16) light, UV-rays, and heat from the young sun; (17) energy from radioactive elements; (18) ionizing radiation; (19) etc.) could have facilitated the formation of many simple biomolecules on early Earth such as amino acids, (20) lipids, (21) nucleotides, (22) simple sugars, (23) or even phosphorus-containing compounds, (24) which could have exhibited important functions or contributions to possibly kick-start the OoL.

However, it is important to recognize that the OoL is not necessarily strictly bound to the canonical biomolecules (i.e., lipids, amino acids, etc.). Other prebiotically available organic molecules could have also played equally essential roles during the emergence of life. (25,26) In particular, we speculate that the properties of α-hydroxy acids (αHAs) lead this category of molecules to be potential key compounds at the OoL due to their active participation of αHAs in chemistries ranging from the prebiotic world all the way to modern biology. For example, citric acid (CA) and malic acid, both αHAs, serve as intermediates in the Krebs cycle. (27−29) Ribosomes, traditionally known for synthesizing proteins, have also been shown to polymerize various αHAs, including lactic acid (LA) and phenyllactic acid (PA), into polyesters, a process that can be directed by mRNA through genetic-code reprogramming. (30) Apart from αHA involvement in biology, αHAs are also essential in biotechnology and biomedicine. (31−38)

Far from being impossible like creationists claim, although they can never explain which laws of chemistry and/or physics makes it so. it seems there are a growing number of ways in which self-replicating systems that evolved into complex cells could have arisen on pre-biotic Earth. Of course, there is no reason to suppose at the pre-DNA stage, that there was only one type of protocell produced by just one set of conditions. There is no reason two or more could not have arisen then either joined forces in symbiosis or one emerged the winner in a competition for resources.

But however it happened, it clearly did not need an unexplained magician suspending the laws of chemistry and physics and making them do thing they couldn't do on their own.

Stand by for the imminent eviction of creationism's little shrinking god from one of its few remaining refuges, as science closes yet another gap where gods used to live in more primitive and unenlightened times.

---

Advertisement

Amazon

Amazon

Amazon

Amazon

Amazon

Amazon

Amazon

Advertisement

Thank you for sharing!

Tweet Link

Unintelligent Design - How Creationism's Heath-Robinson Designer Muddles Through But Still Messes Up.

spB^d-II complex at average resolutions of 3.2 and 3.1 Å.

Quality control during splicing: When an error in the precursor mRNA is detected, the spliceosome is blocked, the recruited control factors interrupt the “normal” cycle, and a molecular short circuit causes the spliceosome to disassemble.

© K. Wild, K. Soni, I. Sinning.

Spliceosome: How Cells Avoid Errors When Manufacturing mRNA

Q. How can you tell when something is designed by a supreme intelligence with the inerrant ability of foresight?

A. It works perfectly, without errors and does exactly what it was intended to do, nothing more and nothing less.

Q. How can you tell when something is 'designed' by a natural, utilitarian process like evolution by natural selection?

A. It works most of the time, even if not very efficiently, is over-complex and so prone to errors and doesn't anticipate change. It also frequently requires additional layers of complexity to compensate for its errors and inefficiency.

Sadly for intelligent design advocates, structures and processes found in nature are almost never perfect and free from errors and, when examined closely, are seen to be error-prone, suboptimal and requiring additional complexity to compensate for the errors and inefficiencies. And these error-correction mechanisms are themselves error-prone and prone to failure.

One such mechanism, the details of which have just been worked out by researchers at the Heidelberg University Biochemistry Center (BZH) in collaboration with colleagues from the Australian National University, is the system of spliceosomes found in eukaryote cells, that correct the errors in messenger RNA (mRNA) before they are transcribed into functional proteins.

The reason these large nuclear proteins are required is because the DNA the mRNA is transcribed from is contains 'introns' - small sequences that are not part of the gene being coded for. Imagine a computer database of words, which, when a retrieved, inserts random letters in the middle of the word.

Refuting Creationism - 183-Million-Year-Old Fossilised Soft Tissue - Stand By For Creationist Lies

The tip of the right flipper with two scales along the trailing edge.

Image: Klaus Nilkens/Urwelt-Museum Hauff

This article is best read on a laptop, desktop, or tablet

Soft tissue from a 183 Million-Year-Old Jurassic Plesiosaur analysed | Lund University

Some palaeontology finds must seem like a god-send to creationist cult leaders looking for something to misrepresent to their dupes, but it has been a few years since Dr. Mary Higby Schweitzer's team reported finding 'soft' tissue in a fossilised dinosaur bone.

Creationists routinely misrepresent this discovery, particularly the discovery of soft-tissue structures in fossilised dinosaur bones. Schweitzer and her team found microscopic structures resembling blood vessels, cells, and proteins in well-preserved fossils, which creationists have seized upon as supposed evidence that dinosaurs lived only a few thousand years ago, rather than tens of millions. However, their claims are based on a fundamental misunderstanding—or deliberate misrepresentation—of both the science and Schweitzer’s own conclusions.

Far from supporting a young Earth, Schweitzer’s findings actually highlight the remarkable durability of biological molecules under specific conditions. Her research suggests that iron particles from haemoglobin help preserve proteins by acting as a natural fixative, similar to formaldehyde. This explains how soft-tissue structures can persist for millions of years without requiring the fossils to be "recent," as creationists falsely claim. Despite Schweitzer’s repeated clarifications that her discoveries do not challenge the vast timescales of evolutionary history, creationists continue to misquote her work to fit their pre-existing religious narratives.

This distortion is part of a broader pattern in which creationists cherry-pick scientific findings, strip them of context, and twist them to manufacture doubt about evolutionary theory. Rather than engaging with the scientific explanations provided by Schweitzer and other researchers, they rely on misleading rhetoric to persuade those unfamiliar with the complexities of molecular preservation. In doing so, they not only misrepresent the science but also the integrity of the scientists behind it. Some creationists even claim the tissue was carbon dated to just a few thousand years old. This is a lie since no such dating was performed because carbon dating is only accurate on specimens less than about 50,000 years old and is never used to date fossils because the original carbon from the living animal is lost in the mineralisation process.

And now we have something else for the frauds to fool their dupes with and win new ignorant simpletons into the creationist cult.

It comes in the form of a report by researchers at Lund University in Sweden which concerns 'soft' tissue found in a fossilised plesiosaur. However, and this is something that creationists will ignore in their eagerness to misrepresent the find - the fossilised tissue is fossilised hard parts of skin, such as scales. There is no question of the fossils being soft tissue. Creationists will also dismiss the fact that the fossil is 183 million years old and will claim the presence of soft tissue 'proves' the dating method is flawed because it must only be a few thousand years old.

Unintelligent Design - An Arms Betwen The Sexes!

Females position their legs to make their bodies look more attractive to a male

Male flies' better vision called the females' bluff | University of Gothenburg

When dance flies mate, females make themselves more attractive by swallowing air and laying their hairy legs along their bodies to look like they are full of eggs. New research shows that the males have developed better eyesight, probably to detect the deception.

As I showed in my books, The unintelligent Designer: Refuting the Intelligent Design Hoax and Unintelligently Designed Arms Races: How Nature Refutes Intelligent Design, the natural arms races that are ubiquitous in nature make no sense as the work of an intelligence. It is simply not an intelligent act to have an ultimately pointless arm race with yourself.

Arms races happen because one side doesn't know the other side's next move but falling behind could be ultimately fatal. Both sides have no option but to use the 'Red Queen strategy' of running ever faster just to stand still. It makes as much sense as playing poker with yourself. As the act of an intelligence, it would mean the designer sees the solution to yesterdays' problem as today's problem to be solved. It probably tells us a great more than they might wish us to know that creationists think this is a sign of supreme intelligence.
The latest such arms race to be revealed by science makes even less sense from an intelligent design perspective if that's possible. This one is an arms race between the sexes in an order of insects known as dance flies and is the result of the two different strategies the males and females use to ensure they get the best mate and so produce the fittest offspring.

Dance flies are (mostly) predatory flies that kill and eat other insects. To attracts a female, males perform a dance with other males in a flying display. The females attract a male by showing him her abdomen in full of eggs and she is ready to be inseminated. The male then pursues the female and presents her with a dead insect as food. She then allows him to mate with her. They will then go off and repeat the mating rituals so both will mate with multiple partners. The female then lays her fertilised eggs in damp soil where they hatch and live as larvae and pupa until ready to hatch and repeat the cycle.

It is in the females reproductive interest to attract the fittest males and she does this by flying in front of him to display a large body full of eggs, while the male concentrates his efforts of pursuing the female most likely to produce a large batch of eggs, and presenting her with a nutritious meal in return for mating with her.

Malevolent Design - How Sudan Virus is Cleverly Designed to Kill 50% of Its Victims

Cryo-EM structure of Sudan ebolavirus glycoprotein complexed with its human endosomal receptor NPC1

New Study Reveals How Sudan Virus Binds to Human Cells | Midwest Antiviral Drug Discovery (AViDD) Center

It's shaping up to be a thrilling month for devotees of creationism's divine malevolence as science finds out just how brilliantly its nasty little parasites are designed to make us sick and increase the suffering in the world, although quite why any normal person would worship a hate-filled sadistic psychopath is even more of a mystery than the mechanism by which it designs and creates organisms.

The latest is the details of how the Sudan virus (a variant of Ebola with a 50% 'success' rate in terms of deaths of its victims) has an improved method of binding to our cells to gain entry and start the killing process. Like Ebola, it binds to receptors on the cell surface, but because it has just 4 different amino acids in its coat proteins, it binds much more efficiently - a factor which probably contributes to its high kill rate.

Malevolent Design - More Brilliance from Creationism's Divine Malevolence

Dengue signs and symptoms

Source: CDC

Female mosquito taking a blood meal

Hijacking of plasmin by dengue virus for infection - NUS Faculty of Science | NUS Faculty of Science

If you're a creationists who follows the latest science (if there is such a thing), you must be bursting with admiration for the ingenuity of your beloved intelligent designer for the way its brilliance at making us sick and spreading more suffering in the world is being revealed by science.

In the last few days, I've reported on how HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, is designed to hijack our cell's metabolic processes to ensure its own survival, and how the zika virus that cause the serious birth defect, microcephaly, in children if their mothers become infected during pregnancy, is brilliantly designed to make our skin produce more of the scent that attracts mosquitoes, so ensuring it is spread as widely as possible.

Now we have a superb example of this skill in malevolent design revealed by researchers from the National University of Singapore (NUS) who have discovered how the dengue virus is designed to make sure as many people as possible are infected by it. And this is breath-taking in its ingenuity. It is spread by the divine malevolence's favourite insect vector - the mosquito.

Refuting Creationism - How Bonobos Help Us Find Something When They Know We Don't Know Where It Is

Kanzi

Image: Ape Initiative

Nyota

Image: Ape Initiative

Don't know something? Apes can tell | Hub

The thing about Creationists is that, whilst they can't make testable predictions and their claims are non-falsifiable, they nevertheless make claims, based not on what the evidence shows, but on what they would like to be true to be as important as they like to imagine they are.

For example, they claim that there are certain features of humans that distinguish us from all the other species (ignoring that all species have unique features, which is what makes them distinct species). Most of these claims will be about our intelligence, social interactions and ethics and our artistic and aesthetic abilities.

Curiously, because they reject the idea that our ability to empathise is the basis of our social ethics, preferring to claim they get their morals from their god because that makes them feel superior to people with a different religion or none, they nevertheless will assert that compassion is one of those uniquely human characteristics that sets us apart from the other animals, so is evidence of our special creation by a magic creator who created everything just for us.

But like so many of their claims, this one turns out to be not only not unique to humans but evidence of common ancestry with the other apes - in this case bonobos, our closest relative. Bonobos have the ability to realise when there is something we don't know and to understand when we need to be educated - something that psychologists beleved was a uniquely human ability.

What information do you have concerning bonobos and their ability to empathise? Bonobos (Pan paniscus) are known for their remarkable capacity for empathy, which has been widely studied by primatologists and psychologists. Their social behaviour demonstrates strong emotional intelligence, cooperation, and conflict resolution skills, making them one of the most empathetic of non-human animals.

Key Evidence for Bonobo Empathy

1. Consolation Behaviour
   • Bonobos console distressed individuals by embracing, touching, and grooming them. Studies, such as those by Frans de Waal and Zanna Clay, show that bonobos, especially juveniles, frequently comfort upset group members.
   • Unlike some other primates, bonobos will console unrelated individuals, suggesting a form of empathy that extends beyond kinship or direct social bonds.
2. Yawn Contagion
   • Bonobos exhibit contagious yawning, particularly when observing familiar individuals yawn. This behaviour is thought to reflect an ability to emotionally resonate with others. Studies indicate that the stronger the social bond, the more likely an individual is to "catch" a yawn.
3. Altruism and Helping Behaviour
   • Bonobos display spontaneous helping behaviour, even in non-reciprocal situations. Research has shown that they will help strangers obtain food without expecting immediate rewards.
   • Experiments at Lola ya Bonobo sanctuary demonstrated that bonobos would unselfishly share food with unfamiliar individuals rather than hoarding it.
4. Cooperative Problem Solving
   • In contrast to chimpanzees, who often engage in competitive strategies, bonobos are more likely to cooperate when solving tasks. Studies show they work together harmoniously to retrieve food, even when dominant individuals could monopolize resources.
5. Emotional Sensitivity and Social Bonds
   • Bonobos are highly sensitive to emotional cues in their group members. Their facial expressions, vocalizations, and body language communicate distress, pleasure, or reassurance.
   • They engage in socio-sexual behaviours (such as genital rubbing) to diffuse tension and maintain social harmony, which may be an expression of empathetic bonding.

Comparisons with Other Primates

• While chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) also display some empathy, their social structure is more hierarchical and aggressive, often limiting empathetic behaviours to kin or allies.
• Bonobos, in contrast, live in matriarchal societies where social bonds are maintained through affection and non-aggressive conflict resolution, reinforcing their empathetic tendencies.

Neuroscientific Basis

• Studies of bonobo brains suggest that their limbic system (including the amygdala and anterior cingulate cortex) is more developed than in chimpanzees, which may enhance their capacity for emotional processing and empathy.

Conclusion
Bonobos are among the most empathetic primates, capable of understanding and responding to the emotions of others. Their ability to console, cooperate, and help even strangers suggests a deep-rooted evolutionary foundation for empathy, which may shed light on the development of human social emotions.

This was demonstrated by two researchers with Johns Hopkins University's Social and Cognitive Origins Group, published yesterday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Don't know something? Apes can tell

---

To get treats, apes eagerly pointed them out to humans who didn't know where they were, a seemingly simple experiment that demonstrated for the first time that apes will communicate unknown information in the name of teamwork. The study also provides the clearest evidence to date that apes can intuit another's ignorance, an ability thought to be uniquely human.

---

Key Takeaways

• Apes can intuit another’s ignorance, an ability thought to be uniquely human.
• When apes know their partners are ignorant, they will point them toward missing information.

The ability to sense gaps in one another's knowledge is at the heart of our most sophisticated social behaviors, central to the ways we cooperate, communicate, and work together strategically. Because this so-called theory of mind supports many of the capacities that make humans unique, like teaching and language, many believe it is absent from animals. But this work demonstrates the rich mental foundations that humans and other apes share—and suggests that these abilities evolved millions of years ago in our common ancestors.

Professor Christopher Krupenye, co-author Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Krupenye and co-author Luke Townrow, a Johns Hopkins PhD student, worked with three male bonobos—Nyota, 25; Kanzi, 43; and Teco, 13, all living at Ape Initiative, a research and education nonprofit. During the experiment one of the bonobos would sit with Townrow, facing each other across a table, the ape on the other side of metal gate. The bonobo would watch as a second person placed a treat, a grape or a Cheerio, under one of three cups. Sometimes Townrow could see where the treat was going, sometimes he couldn't. The bonobo could have the treat if Townrow could find it.

Whether or not Townrow saw where the treat was hidden, he'd say, "Where's the grape?" and then wait 10 seconds. If he'd seen the treat being hidden, during the 10 seconds the ape would usually sit still and wait for the treat. But when Townrow hadn't seen where the treat was hidden, the ape would quickly point to the right cup—sometimes quite demonstratively.

Their fingers would point right through the mesh—it was clear what they were trying to communicate. One, Kanzi, who was very food motivated, would point repeatedly in certain phases of the experiment—he'd tap several times to get our attention and was quite insistent about it.

We predicted that if apes are really tracking ignorance, when their partners lacked knowledge they would be pointing more often and more quickly and that's exactly what they did. The results also suggest apes can simultaneously hold two conflicting world views in their mind. They know exactly where the food is, and at the same time, they know that their partner's view of the same situation is missing that information.

Professor Christopher Krupenye.

The work is the first to replicate in a controlled setting similar findings from the wild that suggest chimpanzees will vocalize to warn groupmates ignorant to potential threats, such as a snake.

The team was thrilled to further confirm apes' mental sophistication.

There are debates in the field about the capabilities of primates, and for us it was exciting to confirm that they really do have these rich capacities that some people have denied them.

Professor Christopher Krupenye.

What we've shown here is that apes will communicate with a partner to change their behavior, but a key open question for further research is whether apes are also pointing to change their partner's mental state or their beliefs.

Luke A. Townrow, first author. Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.

This work demonstrates the rich mental foundations that humans and other apes share—and suggests that these abilities evolved millions of years ago in our common ancestors.

Professor Christopher Krupenye.

Next the team will work to more deeply explore the apes' motivations and how they think about other individuals' minds.

Publication:

L.A. Townrow, & C. Krupenye
Bonobos point more for ignorant than knowledgeable social partners Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 122 (6) e2412450122, DOI; 10.1073/pnas.2412450122 (2025).

Abstract
Numerous uniquely human phenomena, from teaching to our most complex forms of cooperation, depend on our ability to tailor our communication to the knowledge and ignorance states of our social partners. Despite four decades of research into the “theory of mind” capacities of nonhuman primates, there remains no evidence that primates can communicate on the basis of their mental state attributions, to enable feats of coordination. Moreover, recent reevaluation of the experimental literature has questioned whether primates can represent others’ ignorance at all. The present preregistered study investigated whether bonobos are capable of attributing knowledge or ignorance about the location of a hidden food reward to a cooperative human partner, and utilizing this attribution to modify their communicative behavior in the service of coordination. Bonobos could receive a reward that they had watched being hidden under one of several cups, if their human partner could locate the reward. If bonobos can represent a partner’s ignorance and are motivated to communicate based on this mental state attribution, they should point more frequently, and more quickly, to the hidden food’s location when their partner is ignorant about that location than when he is knowledgeable. Bonobos indeed flexibly adapted the frequency and speed of their communication to their partner’s mental state. These findings suggest that apes can represent (and act on) others’ ignorance in some form, strategically and appropriately communicating to effectively coordinate with an ignorant partner and change his behavior.

A growing body of work suggests that monkeys and apes share with humans rich precursors of theory of mind, the ability to infer the mental states that guide others’ actions (1–3). However, major debates concern what distinguishes human theory of mind in terms of both its functions and its underlying representations. Regarding function, various scholars have argued for decades that what makes humans special is a remarkable propensity for cooperation and that the underlying mechanism is a unique capacity to harness theory of mind to communicate in service of coordination (4). For example, we readily adapt our communication to the knowledge and ignorance states of our partners to change their mental states (5), and behavior, and enable cooperative acquisition of goals. While no research has addressed this ability in nonhuman great apes, two studies shed light on its precursors. First, Grueneisen et al. (6) found that chimpanzees and bonobos can facilitate coordination by adjusting the visibility of their actions for a cooperative partner relative to a competitive one, though their task did not involve communication or experimentally isolate theory of mind. Second, Crockford et al. (7) found that wild chimpanzees may be able to communicate based on a recipient’s mental state: Chimpanzees produced more warning vocalizations in the presence of groupmates who were ignorant about a nearby snake, compared to those who were knowledgeable. However, experiments in controlled and nonthreatening settings are needed to eliminate alternative explanations (e.g., that chimpanzees simply responded to others’ behavior, or were driven by arousal) and to clarify whether this capacity can be deployed flexibly in other contexts and via other communicative modalities. Paradigms with greater control are also essential for isolating the particular cues subjects are sensitive to and constraining the hypotheses about the underlying mechanisms driving this pattern of communication, especially following contradictory findings in captivity (8).

Regarding the underlying representations, a reevaluation of the literature has compellingly shown that controlled studies testing primates’ capacity to represent others’ knowledge or ignorance could be explained by attributing only knowledge-like states called awareness relations (9). This is because past paradigms make positive predictions only about how subjects should act if they have attributed knowledge (e.g., avoid food known to a competitor) but not ignorance (i.e., refs. 1, 3, and 10–12). Thus, no controlled studies have directly tested for primates’ capacity to represent others’ ignorance. One central prediction that distinguishes ignorance representation from deflationary accounts is that only primates who can represent others’ ignorance should be able to act on those representations, for example, through communication.

To clarify the unique functions and representations underlying human theory of mind, we tested whether our closest relatives, bonobos (Pan paniscus), can identify a partner’s ignorance and adapt communication to enable coordination. In a highly controlled preregistered study, captive bonobos could point and remedy a partner’s ignorance. Bonobos could receive a reward that they had watched being hidden under one of several cups, if their human partner could locate the reward. If bonobos can represent a partner’s ignorance and are motivated to communicate based on this mental state attribution, they should point more frequently, and more quickly, to the hidden food’s location when their partner is ignorant about that location than when he is knowledgeable.

L.A. Townrow, & C. Krupenye
Bonobos point more for ignorant than knowledgeable social partners Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 122 (6) e2412450122, DOI; 10.1073/pnas.2412450122 (2025).

Copyright: © 2025 The authors.
Published by National Academy of Science of the USA. Open access.
Reprinted under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0)

Once again, something proclaimed by creationists as proof of the special creation of humans turns out to be evidence for our common ancestry with the other African apes. This is how you can tell that creationists claims are not based on evidence so are not worth paying attention to.