Refuting Creationism - A 'Hell Ant' For The Science Deniers

Vulcanidris cratensis (Scale bar, 2 mm.)

Figure 2 Photographs depicting details of Vulcanidris cratensis gen. et sp. nov. Holotype (MZSP-CRA-0002).

• (A) Head and anterior portion of mesosoma. Scale bar, 1 mm.
• (B) Mesosoma. Scale bar, 1 mm.
• (C) Left forewing. Scale bar, 1 mm.
• (D) Right forewing. Scale bar, 1 mm.
• (E) Detail of head. Scale bar, 0.5 mm.
• (F) Detail of petiole. Scale bar, 0.5 mm.
• (G) Metasoma. Scale bar, 1 mm. Arrowheads indicate key characters mentioned in the text.

Ancient ‘Hell Ant’ Discovery Is Also The Oldest Ant Fossil Ever Unearthed | StudyFinds

Most dedicated creationist advocates will already be familiar with the mental gymnastics required to assert that a coelacanth allegedly remaining unchanged for tens of millions of years somehow disproves evolution, therefore life must have been magically created ex nihilo just a few thousand years ago.

Now they have a new specimen to test their contortions even further: a beautifully preserved 113-million-year-old ant fossil from Brazil—the oldest ant fossil discovered to date. Remarkably, by 113 million years ago, this now-extinct species was already highly specialised as a predator, equipped with distinctive scythe-like mandibles. These formidable features have earned it the informal nickname "hell ant."

The exquisitely preserved limestone fossil clearly reveals detailed wings and wing veins, characteristic of the insect order Hymenoptera, confirming ants' close evolutionary relationship with wasps and bees. Since wings are typically absent in worker ants, the presence of fully developed wings strongly suggests that this specimen represents a reproductive female—likely a queen.

This remarkable ant fossil was identified within a collection originating from the Crato Formation in northern Brazil, housed in the Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de São Paulo. The Crato limestone was deposited in a shallow lake environment approximately 113 million years ago during the Early Cretaceous period, at a time when the ancient southern supercontinent Gondwana had not yet fully separated into what would become modern-day Africa and South America.

Unintelligent Design - Stupidly Doing The Same Thing In Two Different Ways

A green stick insect (Timema cristinae) blends in on a
California lilac, Ceanothus spinosus.

Photo Credit: Aaron Comeault.

Timema cristinae (striped morph)

Credit: Bart Zijlstra www.bartzijlstra.com

USU Evolutionary Biologist Says Study Reveals Complex Chromosomal Rearrangements in a Stick Insect

The wingless, plant-feeding stick insect, Timema cristinae, occurs in two different cryptic colour morphs. One has longitudinal white stripes along its back on an otherwise green body, while the second is a uniform plain green.

The striped morph is found on Adenostoma fasciculatum, a plant with long, needle-like leaves, where the stripes help break up the outline of the insect’s body, making it resemble a cluster of green needles. In contrast, the plain green morph is found on Ceanothus spinosus, which has broader, more tree-like leaves on which conspicuous white stripes would be maladaptive.

This seems entirely sensible and, from the perspective of an intelligent designer, a perfectly reasonable way to protect stick insects from predation — setting aside, for the sake of argument, the questionable logic of designing predators to eat stick insects and then designing stick insects to avoid being eaten.

However, the means by which this cryptic colouration was achieved in populations of Timema cristinae on two different mountains, where the respective host plants grow, is more typical of the behaviour of creationism’s putative designer. In each case, the same camouflage was achieved through entirely different genetic mechanisms. This tendency to reinvent the metaphorical wheel appears to be a hallmark of creationism’s “intelligent” designer — seen, for example, in the development of different wing structures in birds and bats, different forms of insulation in mammalian fur and bird feathers, and several distinct designs for eyes.

Of course, there is no reason to expect a mindless natural process such as evolution by natural selection to respond to identical environmental pressures in precisely the same way in two geographically isolated populations. All that matters is whether the eventual adaptation — in this case, effective camouflage — is functionally comparable.

Creationism Refuted - Isolated Evolution of a Curious Butterfly

The Curiously Isolated Hairstreak, Satyrium curiosolus.

A freshly eclosed S. curiosolus on silvery lupine (Lupinus argenteus).

Curious isolation: new butterfly species discovered | Blog

If creationists had even a basic understanding of scientific evidence, they could hardly fail to recognise how thoroughly it refutes creationism. This may help explain why creationist advocates work so hard to ensure their followers remain ignorant of that evidence—or only encounter a distorted version of it. It's also why many creationists willingly participate in their own deception by avoiding fact-checking and reading genuine scientific literature, preferring instead to consume misinformation circulated within their echo chambers.

Foremost among the misconceptions is the claim that mainstream biologists are increasingly finding evolutionary theory inadequate and are therefore turning to Intelligent Design (ID) creationism as a superior alternative.

A close second is the notion that there is no evidence to support the scientific view that species have diverged from common ancestors through evolutionary processes. These processes include environmental selection acting on genetic variation—differentially favouring some alleles while eliminating others—thereby shifting the gene pool over time towards greater reproductive fitness in a given environment.

If they were able to comprehend this, and if they had the intellectual honesty to accept it, creationists would realise that recent findings—such as the discovery of a new butterfly species that appears to have been isolated in a small region of the Canadian Rockies for around 40,000 years—completely undermine these two core dogmas.

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.

Refuting Creationism - How Leaf Beetles Got New Genes

The leaf beetle Spilopyra sumptuosa lives in the rainforests of eastern Australia. Its spectacular, colourful appearance is an example of the rich diversity of the large family of leaf beetles.

© Veit Grabe / Roy Kirsch,
Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology

Asparagus beetle, Crioceris asparagi

David Gould

Reading the genome and understanding evolution: Symbioses and gene transfer in leaf beetles

Creationists who have been fooled by the disinformation pumped out by the Discovery Institute, especially by William Dembski, believe that the only way an organism can gain new genetic information is by being given it, pre-prepared, by a magic intelligent designer, who has the magical power to assemble new DNA in just the right order and insert it into a species' genome, by a mysterious process that neither Dembski, nor one of his co-misinformers, are willing to explain.

This, of course, ignores the scientific evidence that new genetic information can be acquired by a species in several different ways, not the least of which is by horizontal gene transfer from another species, as researchers from the Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology in Jena, the Max Planck Institute of Biology in Tübingen, Germany, and a consortium of international scientists have just shown in respect of the leaf beetles, one of the most successful group of beetles with more than 50,000 different species worldwide.

Refuting Creationism - Another Gap Closed - No God Found

A mating pair of wild-type (left) and mir-193 mutant (right) Bicyclus anynana butterflies.

Photo credit: Shen TIAN

A mating pair of peppered moths, Biston betularia, showing the melanistic and pale forms.

A microRNA solves an evolutionary mystery of butterfly and moth wing colouration - NUS Faculty of Science | NUS Faculty of Science

A regularly-cited example of observed Darwinian evolution is that of the peppered moth which occurs in two forms, the white, speckled form and a melanistic, almost black form. During the industrial revolution, as English northern towns grew and became polluted by smoke from coal-burning factories, so the melanistic form became more common.

Experiments showed that the lighter form became easier for predators to see when the moths were roosting on tree trunks that had become coated in soot, while the melanistic form became harder for predators to see.

Following the decline of the northern towns, the light form again increased back to the former ratio, showing the importance of environmental change in evolution.

This tendency to have melanistic forms is common in the lepidoptera (moths and butterflies) and this tendency was believed to be under th control of as single genomic region surrounding the protein-coding gene “cortex“, common across many species, showing their descent from a common ancestor.

However, new research by international researchers from Singapore, Japan, and the United States of America, led by Professor Antónia MONTEIRO and Dr Shen TIAN from the Department of Biological Sciences at the National University of Singapore (NUS), has shown that 'cortex' is not directly involved in producing melanism, instead, this is controlled by a microRNA from within the 'cortex' genomic region, as another example of how microRNA's control many functions within cells, particular gene expression.

Refuting Creationism - How Ants Were Cultivating Crops 66 Million Years Before 'Creation Week'.

A lower-fungus-farming worker of the rare fungus-farming ant species Mycetophylax asper, collected in Santa Catarina, Brazil, in 2014, on its fungus garden.

Credit: Don Parsons.

Atta colombica queen

By Christian R. Linder - own photo, Barro Colorado Island, Panama (1999), CC BY-SA 3.0, Link

Ant Agriculture Began 66 Million Years Ago in the Aftermath of the Asteroid That Doomed the Dinosaurs | Smithsonian Institution

One of the 'uniquely human' abilities that creationists traditionally cite in support of their childish superstition that humans were magically created out of dirt as a species separate from other animals, is the fact that humans for the most part, indulge in agriculture - i.e., we grow plants as food - or at least other people do. Most of us in the developed economies buy their produce in shops.

a Like all their other claims of human exceptionalism, it's a nonsense fairy tale, of course. Humans have some unique characteristics that make them a distinct species, but then so does every other species, by definition. There is nothing materially different about humans that makes them subject to different laws of chemistry and physics than other species, of course.
And in respect of agriculture, we are far from unique - ants have been at it for about 66 million years - well before creationists imagine the entire Universe was magically created from nothing by a magic god made of nothing. But this is hardly surprising, since some 99.9975% of the history of life on Earth happened before creationism's legendary 'Creation Week'.

Malevolent Designer News - How A Spider Manipulates Captured Firefles To Become Lures To Catch More Fireflies.

Araneus ventricosus with captured firefly, Abscondita terminalis

Photograph by Xinhua Fu

Abscondita terminalis

CC BY-NC 4.0.

Spider exploits firefly's flashing signals to lure more prey | ScienceDaily

Today comes news that may help cheer up those creationists who haven't managed to avoid all the unwelcome news for creationism that science keeps on producing. It's news of how, in a breathtaking display of brilliant nastiness, an orb web spider appears to have been designed to use captured fireflies to lure more fireflies to their death by manipulating the flashing light signals they display.

Mind you, this will make it harder for creationists to argue that their putative designer is one and the same god as the omnibenevolent creator god of the Bible and Qur'an. Along with the evidence of parasites, and especially parasites that turn their victims into zombies by taking control of their bodies, in some cases even after death, this news reinforces the impression of a hate-filled malevolent creator devising ever-more ingenious ways to kill its creation.

The spider/firefly news come from a team of researchers led by Xinhua Fu, from Huazhong Agricultural University, China. They found that male fireflies, which normally flash two lights in response to the female’s single flash, adopt the female signalling strategy when caught in the web of an orb web spider, Araneus ventricosus. What is not clear without further research is whether this is the result of being bitten by the spider or of simply being caught, but one way or another, it results in more male fireflies being lured to the spider's web.

This finding has just been published in the Cell Press journal Current Biology. It was also explained in information made available ahead of publication and reported in Science Daily:

Creationism in Crisis - More Lousy News For Creationists - Human Evolution Mapped In The Genome Of Head Lice Symbiotic Bacteria

Human head louse, Pediculus humanus capitis

Gilles San Martin via Wikimedia (CC BY-SA 2.0)

Phylogenetic trees for primate lice and their vertebrate hosts redrawn from Reed et al . [9]. Trees are shown as cladograms with no branch length information, and are based on molecular and morphological data. Dashed lines between trees represent host-parasite associations. Humans are unique in being parasitized by two genera (Pediculus and Pthirus). (Herd, K.E., Barker, S.C. & Shao, R.(2015))

Photo credits: J. W. Demastes, T. Choe, and V. Smith.

Genomic Diversity in the Endosymbiotic Bacteria of Human Head Lice | Molecular Biology and Evolution | Oxford Academic

It's a basic principle of evolutionary biology that an obligate commensal, symbiotic or parasitic organism is evolutionary bound to the organism on which it is dependent, It follows then that the genomes of two or more organism in such a relationships will reflect the same major changes which drive evolution.

I have previously described how the evolutionary tree of the human head and body lice, Pediculus humanus, fits exactly on the evolutionary tree of Homo sapiens as we diverged from the common ancestor with chimpanzees. At the same time, our lice diverged from a common ancestor they share with the lice which are obligate parasites on chimpanzees, Pe. schaeffi.

Interestingly, our lice also reflect when we started wearing clothes having lost our body hair. This loss of body hair meant our lice became head lice which are closely related to the chimpanzee's body lice. When we started wearing clothes our lice diverged into two subspecies - head lice, Pe. h. capitis, and body lice, Pe. h. humanus.

And now, something even more interesting and confirmative of evolution, is the discovery that an obligate, symbiont bacteria on which the lice depends, shows exactly the same pattern of divergence, mapped onto the evolutionary tree of the lice.

The symbiotic bacterium, Candidatus Riesia pediculicola, in a typically Heath-Robinson solution to a problem which is a characteristic of mindless, unplanned evolution, and unlike anything an intelligent designer would design, is essential to the lice because they can't make essential B-vitamins and don't get them from the blood on which they exclusively feed.

And, incidentally, these bacteria have evolved by loss of genetic information - something that creationist frauds tell their dupes is impossible because "every loss of genes is invariably fatal" [sic].

This discovery is the subject of a recent open access paper in the journal Molecular Biology & Evolution:

Unintelligent Designer - How Creationism's Idiot Designer Competes With Itself To Overcome The Problems It Designs

Ornate Bella moth, Utetheisa ornatrix.

Photo: Andrei Sourakov.

Ornate Bella moth, Utetheisa ornatrix

Photo: Laura Gaudette via Wikimedia (CC BY 4.0)

Bella moths use poison to attract mates. Scientists are closer to finding out how – Research News

Imagine a man in your street who designs a brilliant defensive structure to put around your property to keep intruders out, and then invents a brilliant protective suit the intruder can wear so he or she can get through your defensive structure. He then designs an improvement in the defences that overcome the protection the suit provides, and, in a final display of madness, he brilliantly designs a remote control the intruder can use to switch off that improvement and so still burgle your property. He or she then uses the proceeds of the burglary to buy more suits and remote controls to give to friends and acquaintances so they can parasitise you too.

This is exactly the sort of mad inventor that creationists believe designs living organisms and the parasites that predate on them or, in the case of plants, eat their leaves, flowers and seeds. The plant gets given defensive chemicals that deter herbivores from eating them and even kills them if the deterrent doesn't work, and then it redesigns one of the organisms to eat the toxic plant not only with complete impunity, but to help it breed more successfully to produce more organisms to eat the toxic plant.

And it goes one step more and designs the organism so it uses the toxins to defend itself and even attract a mate! All very clever, but you can't help wondering what it’s doing it all for, exactly, and who's side is it on in these wasteful arms races of increasing complexity, like running up a down escalator in order to stand still.

An incomprehensible example of this (incomprehensible in terms of intelligent design; perfectly rational in terms of evolution by natural selection) was revealed a few days ago by researchers from the Department of Biophysics, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA together with colleagues from the Department of Biology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA and the McGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity, Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA, who have shown how the Ornate Bella moth, Utetheisa ornatrix, detoxifies the deadly toxins, Pyrrolizidine alkaloids, used as a defence against being eaten by the rattlebox plant amongst others.

And, as a further example of idiot design, the rattlebox plant concentrates its toxin in the seeds - which makes them especially attractive to the bella moth caterpillars. A 'deterrent' that encourages predators to eat its seeds!

Malevolent Design - How a Bacterium Carries a Virus That Selectively Kills Male Insects And Only Allows Infected Females To Breed

How does a virus hijack insect sperm to control disease vectors and pests? | Penn State University

Wolbachia are a genus of bacteria that form a symbiotic relationship with about 50% of arthropod species, including insects and spiders but they can also manipulate the species for their own ends (in terms of breeding success). They are aided in this by a virus which is incorporated in their genome which has been shown to join forces with Wolbachia to ensure their own reproductive success in the form of females infected with the virus-bearing Wolbachia.

So completely have Wolbachia integrated with insects that one species of fruit fly has the entire Wolbachia genome incorporated into its own genome, making it, biologically, both bacterium and fruit fly.

One way Wolbachia ensure their own survival at the expense of the species of insect they infect is by making the sperm and egg incompatible if the female is not also a carrier of the right species of Wolbachia. And, to be on the safe side, two proteins produced by the virus break the sperm's DNA so any resulting embryo will be defective and will fail to develop. This ensures that only the females carrying the infection can breed, so increasing the Wolbachia and its virus in the gene pool.

The team who discovered this nasty little virus and how it acts selfishly, was co-led by Professor Seth R. Bordenstein, of the One Health Microbiome Center at Pennsylvania State University. They have published their findings in Science and described it in a Penn State News item.

But first, a little background on Wolbachia:

Creationism in Crisis - Like Humans, Bumblebees Learn Through Social Interaction And May Have Cumulative Culture

Bumblebees teaching each other to solve a complex puzzle

Buff-tailed Bumblebee, Bombus terrestris

Source: Wikipedia.

Bees master complex tasks through social interaction - Queen Mary University of London

A sacred Tenet of creationism is that we humans are a special creation by the creator of the universe who made everything just for us. They point to the many 'unique' traits and abilities of humans as evidence of this - the ability to teach and learn, to form cultures, even walking upright are frequently cited as examples. It's also a sacred Tenet of creationism that anything which might refute the sacred tenets of creationism must be ignore, hand-waved aside or misrepresented but never, ever acknowledged for what it is - a refutation of creationism.

So, we can expect one or more of those tactics for handling the cognitive dissonance that news that bumble bees can teach and learn and so have at least the basis for forming cumulative cultures. The news itself comes in the form of an open access research paper in Nature by a team Led by Dr Alice Bridges and Lars Chittka, Professor of Sensory and Behavioural Ecology at Queen Mary University of London.

The team showed that a complex, two-step task, which needed to be performed to receive a reward in the form of a sweet liquid could be learned by bees who were allowed to watch a trained 'demonstrator' perform the task. The bees not only learned how to perform the steps involved but that there was a reward to be had for doing so.

The 'demonstrators' had previously been trained by giving intermediate rewards as each stage was completed successfully, which were eventually withdrawn, leaving only the final reward. The experiment and its significance are explained in a Queen Mary University news release:

Unintelligent Design - How The Same Function Evolved Twice - Once in Vertebrates And Again in Insects

Sunset over University of California - Irvine

Diagram of an insect compound eye.

Credit: Bugboy52.40 via Wikipedia (CC BY-SA 3.0 Deed)

UC Irvine study shows similarities and differences in human and insect vision formation – UCI News

Regardless of the different structures in the compound eyes of insects and the eyes of vertebrates, at the heart of them both is a light-sensitive molecule, 11-cis-retinal, also known as 'visual Chromophore', but these are produced in two different ways from the same starting compound - β-carotene - which in humans is obtained from eating plants like carrots which are rich in Vitamin A from which β-carotene is derived.

This is one of those examples which are so common in biology, of where, had it been intelligent, the same designer could have used a process it had designed earlier but did not, instead it designed an even more complex way of doing the same thing, giving the lie to claims that the same 'intelligent' designer designed living things, insects and vertebrates have two different ways to achieve the same product - 11-cis-retinal; the second being the more complicated of the two.


Although the earliest vertebrates appeared about 518 million years ago, so predating the first insects by about 130 million years, the creationists dogma of omniscience which they traditionally ascribe to their putative designer god, would mean this alleged designer was already aware of the less complex way to make 11-cis-retinal, when if supposedly designed the vertebrate method.

Besides, creationist dogma also says they were all created on the same day - 10,000 years ago.

Creationism in Crisis - 250 Million Years of Butterfly And Moth Evolution

Butterfly and moth genomes mostly unchanged despite 250 million years of evolution

It'll no doubt come as a surprise to those creationists who believe Earth was created from nothing by magic just about 10,000 years ago to learn that the butterflies and moths have been evolving for 250 million years.

It'll maybe come as a bigger surprise to those creationists who have been fooled into believing that the Theory of Evolution is being discarded by mainstream biologists in favour of their childish fairy tale of magic and supernatural spirits, that yet another group of mainstream biologists regard it as the foundation of modern biology, and are participating in the Darwin Tree of Life Project, which aims to sequence the genome of 70,000 eukaryote species from Britain and Ireland, to learn their evolutionary relationships.

This project also contributes to the much larger, Earth BioGenome Project.

One of the teams taking part in this project, based at the Wellcome Sanger Institute and the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, has just completed the sequencing of 200 high-quality genome of the Lepidoptera order of insects (moths and butterflies) and discovered some interesting facts about the evolution of the order, including that there are some elements in the genomes, which they term 'Merian elements' after the 17th century entomologist Maria Sibylla Merian, which have remained relatively stable over the 250 million years the order has been evolving.

The research is published in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution and is described in a Welcome Sanger Institute news release:

Creationism in Crisis - The Evolution of Batesian Mimicry in a New Zealand Stonefly

Similar ‘warning’ colouration of the non-toxic mimic Zelandoperla fenestrata stonefly (left), and cyanide-producing Austroperla cyrene (right).

A cyanide-producing Austroperla cyrene sits at the top of this picture, with a mimicking Zelandoperla fenestrata in the center and non-mimicking Zelandoperla fenestrata at the bottom.

Credit: University of Otago

When cheating pays – survival strategy of insect uncovered, News, University of Otago, New Zealand

I've written before about Batesian mimicry as an example of environment-driven evolution and how it depends on an evolutionary arms race - which makes no sense as the work of a single creator god, as creationists believe is responsible for the 'design' of all living organisms.

Batesian mimicry

Batesian mimicry is a fascinating concept in evolutionary biology named after the English naturalist Henry Walter Bates. It refers to a form of mimicry in which a harmless species closely resembles the appearance of a toxic or dangerous species to deceive predators. This phenomenon is commonly observed in the animal kingdom, particularly among insects, although it can also occur in other groups of organisms.

The key components of Batesian mimicry are:

1. Model Species: The toxic or harmful species that possesses some form of defense mechanism, such as toxicity, stinging, or bad taste. Predators learn to associate the distinct appearance of this model species with the negative consequences of attacking or consuming it.

The Humble Earwig - Not a Pest But a Kind And Caring Insect

The Humble Earwig

Not a Pest But A Kind and Caring Insect

Forficula auricularia

Credit: Pudding4brains/Wikipedia

Earwigs are the hero single mothers of the insect world – and good for your garden too

Of the more than 1000 species worldwide, only four are native to the UK, with a further three introduced species.

Earwigs are often regarded as garden pests because they can and sometimes do, damage growing plants and soft fruits such as strawberries, but what is not generally recognised is that they are predators on much more destructive pests such as aphids.

But there are a few things about these fascinating insects that mean they should command our respect and protection by leaving them undisturbed.