Tuesday, 6 August 2024

More Magnificent Than Our Priests And Prophets Told Us


NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope’s mid-infrared view of interacting galaxies Arp 142 seems to sing in primary colors. The Egg shows up as a tiny, teal-colored oval, because it is made up of old stars and has lost or used up most of its gas and dust. At right, the Penguin’s star-forming regions are represented in pink and purple, and contain smoke-like material known as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.

NASA, ESA, CSA, STScI
Vivid Portrait of Interacting Galaxies Marks Webb’s Second Anniversary - NASA Science

It takes a special skill to read the description of the universe in the Bible - a single, small flat planet with a dome over it to which the sun, moon and stars are fixed - compared that with what science shows the universe is really like, and conclude that the Bible must have been written by an omniscient, creator god.

And yet grifters like Ken Ham regularly reassure their followers and source of income, that the Bible is their god's inerrant word and god never lies so it must be the science that's wrong. Of course, since it's his source of excuses that he uses to justify fleecing his flock, what he can never afford for them to realise is that we can tell the Bible could not possibly have been written by the god described in it because it differs so widely from reality.

Why would a god who knew the truth about the Universe uses such a childishly naïve description that it seems to have been written by simple, ignorant people whose entire world consisted of a few square miles of the Middle East, since it contains nothing that wasn't known to them?

Of course, their description was childishly naive because the authors were childishly naïve. It would have been impossible for them to have stood on a Canaanite hill, look up and grasp the true majesty of the Universe - that each tiny point of light could be one of half a trillion stars in a vast galaxy or that other points of light could be one of maybe a trillion other galaxies each with half a trillion stars around which there could be other planets.

At what speed through space would a person standing on a hill in Canaan in 3000 BCE have been travelling? To calculate the speed through space of a person standing on a hill in Canaan in 3000 BCE, we need to consider three main components of motion:
  1. The rotation of the Earth on its axis.
  2. The Earth's orbital motion around the Sun.
  3. The Sun's orbital motion around the center of the Milky Way galaxy.

We'll break down the calculations for each component and then combine them.
  1. Earth's Rotational Speed

    The Earth's rotational speed at the equator can be calculated using the circumference of the Earth and the period of rotation (24 hours).
    • Radius of the Earth (r): approximately 6,371 km
    • Circumference at the equator (C): \(2 \pi \times 6371 \, \text{km}\)
    • Rotation period (T): 24 hours
    \[\small C = 2 \pi \times 6371 \, \text{km} \approx 40,075 \, \text{km} \] \[\small\begin{flalign*} &\text{Rotational speed at the equator}\\ &= \frac{40,075 \, \text{km}}{24 \, \text{hours}} \approx 1670 \, \text{km/h}\end{flalign*} \]

    Since Canaan is not on the equator, we need to account for its latitude. Let's approximate the latitude of Canaan (modern-day Israel) as about 32°N.
    \[\small\begin{flalign*} &\text{Rotational speed at latitude}\\ &= 1670 \, \text{km/h} \times \cos(32°)\end{flalign*} \]
  2. Earth's Orbital Speed Around the Sun

    The Earth's average orbital speed around the Sun can be calculated using the circumference of its orbit and the period of revolution (1 year).
    • Average distance from the Sun (r): approximately 149.6 million km
    • Orbital circumference (C): \(2 \pi \times 149.6 \times 10^6 \, \text{km}\)
    • Orbital period (T): 1 year (365.25 days)
    \[\small C = 2 \pi \times 149.6 \times 10^6 \, \text{km} \approx 940 \times 10^6 \, \text{km} \] \[\small\begin{flalign*} &\text{Orbital speed}\\ &= \frac{940 \times 10^6 \, \text{km}}{365.25 \times 24 \, \text{hours}} \approx 107,000 \, \text{km/h}\end{flalign*} \]
  3. Sun's Orbital Speed Around the Milky Way
    The Sun's orbital speed around the center of the Milky Way galaxy is approximately 220 km/s.
    \[\small \begin{flalign*} &\text{Orbital speed}\\ &= 220 \, \text{km/s} \times 3600 \, \text{s/hour} = 792,000 \, \text{km/h}\end{flalign*} \]
Total Speed

To find the total speed, we can combine these three components as vectors. Since the directions are not perfectly aligned, we'll consider a simplified approach by summing the magnitudes approximately, assuming they are roughly perpendicular.

Calculation:
  1. Earth's rotational speed at 32°N:
    \[\small\begin{flalign*} & 1670 \, \text{km/h} \times \cos(32°)\\ &\approx 1670 \, \text{km/h} \times 0.848 \approx 1417 \, \text{km/h}\end{flalign*} \]
  2. Earth's orbital speed around the Sun:
    \[\small 107,000 \, \text{km/h} \]
  3. Sun's orbital speed around the Milky Way:
    \[\small 792,000 \, \text{km/h} \]

Since these velocities are mostly perpendicular to each other, we can use the Pythagorean theorem to approximate the total speed:
\[\small\begin{flalign*} &\text{Total speed}\\ &\approx \sqrt{(1417^2 + 107,000^2 + 792,000^2)} \, \text{km/h}\end{flalign*} \]

Let's compute this:
\[\small\begin{flalign*} &\text{Total speed}\\ &\approx \sqrt{(1417^2 + 107,000^2 + 792,000^2)} \, \text{km/h}\end{flalign*} \] \[\small\begin{flalign*} &\text{Total speed}\\ &\approx \sqrt{(2,007,489 + 11,449,000,000 + 627,264,000,000)} \, \text{km/h}\end{flalign*} \] \[\small\begin{flalign*} &\text{Total speed}\\ &\approx \sqrt{638,713,007,489} \, \text{km/h}\end{flalign*} \] \[\small\begin{flalign*} &\text{Total speed}\\ &\approx 799,195 \, \text{km/h}\end{flalign*} \]
Thus, a person standing on a hill in Canaan in 3000 BCE would be travelling through space at approximately 799,195 km/h (496596.75 mph)
They couldn't even conceive of the idea that Earth could be a spinning spheroid with several continents, held in orbit around the sun by gravity or that they could actually be travelling through space at almost 500,000 mph. Even a sizable proportion of Americans find that hard to understand and still believe the sun orbits Earth, which is at the center of the Universe, so what chance did uneducated Bronze Age pastoralists have?

And, as though to rub salt in creationists wounds, although that was far from their reason, NASA has just released stunning photos of a tiny fragment of the night sky that could be hidden behind a grain of rice held up between thumb and fore-finger, in which two galaxies are interacting.
Vivid Portrait of Interacting Galaxies Marks Webb’s Second Anniversary
Two for two! A duo of interacting galaxies commemorates the second science anniversary of NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope, which takes constant observations, including images and highly detailed data known as spectra. Its operations have led to a “parade” of discoveries by astronomers around the world.

Since President Biden and Vice President Harris unveiled the first image from the James Webb Space Telescope two years ago, Webb has continued to unlock the mysteries of the universe. With remarkable images from the corners of the cosmos, going back nearly to the beginning of time, Webb’s capabilities are shedding new light on our celestial surroundings and inspiring future generations of scientists, astronomers, and explorers.

NASA Administrator Bill Nelson.

In just two years, Webb has transformed our view of the universe, enabling the kind of world-class science that drove NASA to make this mission a reality. Webb is providing insights into longstanding mysteries about the early universe and ushering in a new era of studying distant worlds, while returning images that inspire people around the world and posing exciting new questions to answer. It has never been more possible to explore every facet of the universe.

Mark Clampin
Director of the Astrophysics Division
NASA Headquarters in Washington.


The telescope’s specialization in capturing infrared light — which is beyond what our own eyes can detect — shows these galaxies, collectively known as Arp 142, locked in a slow cosmic dance. Webb’s observations, which combine near- and mid-infrared light from Webb’s NIRCam (Near-Infrared Camera) and MIRI (Mid-Infrared Instrument), respectively, clearly show that they are joined by a haze represented in blue that is a mix of stars and gas, a result of their mingling.

Their ongoing interaction was set in motion between 25 and 75 million years ago, when the Penguin (individually cataloged as NGC 2936) and the Egg (NGC 2937) completed their first pass. They will go on to shimmy and sway, completing several additional loops before merging into a single galaxy hundreds of millions of years from now.

Let’s Dance!
Before their first approach, the Penguin held the shape of a spiral. Today, its galactic center gleams like an eye, its unwound arms now shaping a beak, head, backbone, and fanned-out tail.

Like all spiral galaxies, the Penguin is still very rich in gas and dust. The galaxies’ “dance” gravitationally pulled on the Penguin’s thinner areas of gas and dust, causing them to crash in waves and form stars. Look for those areas in two places: what looks like a fish in its “beak” and the “feathers” in its “tail.”

Surrounding these newer stars is smoke-like material that includes carbon-containing molecules, known as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which Webb is exceptional at detecting. Dust, seen as fainter, deeper orange arcs also swoops from its beak to tail feathers.

In contrast, the Egg’s compact shape remains largely unchanged. As an elliptical galaxy, it is filled with aging stars, and has a lot less gas and dust that can be pulled away to form new stars. If both were spiral galaxies, each would end the first “twist” with new star formation and twirling curls, known as tidal tails.

Another reason for the Egg’s undisturbed appearance: These galaxies have approximately the same mass or heft, which is why the smaller-looking elliptical wasn’t consumed or distorted by the Penguin.

It is estimated that the Penguin and the Egg are about 100,000 light-years apart — quite close in astronomical terms. For context, the Milky Way galaxy and our nearest neighbor, the Andromeda Galaxy, are about 2.5 million light-years apart. They too will interact, but not for about 4 billion years.

Now, look to the top right to spot a galaxy that is not at this party. This edge-on galaxy, cataloged PGC 1237172, is 100 million light-years closer to Earth. It’s also quite young, teeming with new, blue stars.

Want one more party trick? Switch to Webb’s mid-infrared-only image to see PGC 1237172 practically disappear. Mid-infrared light largely captures cooler, older stars and an incredible amount of dust. Since the galaxy’s stellar population is so young, it “vanishes” in mid-infrared light.

Also take a moment to scan the background. Webb’s image is overflowing with distant galaxies. Some take spiral and oval shapes, like those threaded throughout the Penguin’s “tail feathers,” while others scattered throughout are shapeless dots. This is a testament to the sensitivity and resolution of the telescope’s infrared instruments. (Compare Webb’s view to the 2018 observation that combines infrared light from NASA’s retired Spitzer Space Telescope and near-infrared and visible light from NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope.) Even though these observations only took a few hours, Webb revealed far more distant, redder, and dustier galaxies than previous telescopes – one more reason to expect Webb to continue to expand our understanding of everything in the universe.

Want more? Take a tour to the image, “fly through” it in a visualization, and compare Webb’s image to the Hubble Space Telescope’s.

Arp 142 lies 326 million light-years from Earth in the constellation Hydra.

Video: Tour the Arp 142 Image
Video tour transcript
Credit: NASA, ESA, CSA, STScI, Danielle Kirshenblat (STScI)


Video: Arp 142 Visualization
Credit: NASA, ESA, CSA, Ralf Crawford (STScI), Joseph DePasquale (STScI), Christian Nieves (STScI), Joseph Olmsted (STScI), Alyssa Pagan (STScI), Frank Summers (STScI), Greg Bacon (STScI)
Image 2 Image 1
Hover over the dividing line then click to move and compare the two images
Hubble Space Telescope
Webb Space Telescope
A selection of images from the James Webb Space Telescope in 2024
Oh! Silly me! That last one isn't from the James Webb Space Telescope! It's the way the people who wrote the Bible thought the Universe looked like! spot the difference!

It defies belief that there are adults, mostly in the USA, who believe that description in the Bible far surpasses for accuracy and reliability anything that science can reveal, and that this 'amazing accuracy' is proof that it was written by an inerrant god who created it all.

You might expect the fact that the Bible's description is so hilariously naïve would be taken as evidence that the description is proof of exactly the opposite: that the Bible could not have been written by an omniscient god who created the Universe it so inaccurately describes, but there is something about religion that seems to prevent intellectual honesty and the humility to allow evidence to inform opinion. Religion seems to produce the delusion that opinion informs the evidence and if they conflict, then opinion trumps evidence.

The same people also claim to worship a god who told them that vanity is a mortal sin, and a terrible fate awaits those who transgress.

Monday, 5 August 2024

Refuting Creationism - Fruit Bats have 'Uniquely Human' Abilities


Egyptian fruit bat, Rousettus aegyptiacus
Can Bats Think Ahead of Time? | Tel Aviv University | Tel Aviv University | Tel Aviv University

Creationists insist that humans are a special creation apart from all the other animals, and normally cite a list of 'uniquely human' abilities as evidence, oblivious of the fact that every species has some unique characteristics - which is why they are a different species.

One by one, with monotonous regularity, over the last 50 years or so, the list has shrunk and one by one these 'uniquely human' characteristics have been shown to be possessed by at least one other species. We used to be the 'only' tool-making species, now there must be about a dozen species who make and/or use tools, including chimpanzees, crows, bumblebees and sea otters.

In fact, what creationists used to claim 'proved' the special creation of humans, because that ability is present in one of more of our great ape relatives, it not only fails to 'prove' special creation but, with delicious irony, actually supports common origins.

Refuting Creationism - The 'Smoking Gun' of Life On Early Mars


Mount Sharp in the centre of Gale Crater where organic material was found by Curiosity Rover

Photo: NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS
Organic material from Mars reveals the likely origin of life’s building blocks – University of Copenhagen

Those creationists who understand the implication for their superstition will be dreading the discovery of evidence of life elsewhere in the Universe, so to have it discovered on our neighbouring planet in the solar system will be doubly worrying for them.

The reason for this fear is that they have invested so much of their argument for a magic creator in a proclaimed vast unlikelihood to the point of impossibility, of inorganic elements forming themselves into organic molecules - the basic building blocks of living systems. Combine that with their false dichotomy fallacy which says the only possibility is that their locally popular god did it, and you have the basis of the creationist argument from 'impossible' abiogenesis.

So, discovering that it happened on Mars shows that not only is it not impossible, nor even highly unlikely, but it happens when the conditions are right as easily as mixing hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide gives table salt (\(\small \text{HCl} + \text{NaOH} \rightarrow \text{NaCl} + \text{H}_2\text{O}\)). No magic is needed, and it can all be accounted for with the basic laws of chemistry and physics.

Of course, those creationists who have been preparing for this eventuality will simply declare that their unproven magic creator did it there too. Sadly for them this just leaves them to explain why a supposedly omniscient, super-intelligent creator would create the building blocks for organic life on a planet so singularly unsuitable for living systems as Mars?

What would be the consequences for creationism if the building blocks for living systems were found on Mars? The discovery of the building blocks for living systems on Mars would have significant implications for various perspectives on creationism, particularly in how they interpret the origin and distribution of life. Here are some potential consequences:
  1. Young Earth Creationism (YEC):
    • Challenge to Beliefs: YEC proponents typically believe that Earth and life were created relatively recently (within the last 10,000 years) and uniquely by divine action. Finding the building blocks of life on Mars could challenge the view that Earth is the exclusive site of creation.
    • Reinterpretation of Evidence: YEC advocates might argue that these building blocks were either created by God on Mars or arrived there via panspermia from Earth, thus maintaining that life is still unique to God's creation on Earth.
  2. Old Earth Creationism (OEC):
    • Expanded View of Creation: OEC proponents, who accept the scientific consensus on the age of the Earth but believe that life was created by God over billions of years, might see the discovery as evidence of a broader scope of divine creation. They might argue that God created life or its precursors not only on Earth but also elsewhere in the universe.
    • Integration with Science: OEC might integrate this discovery into their worldview, suggesting that the building blocks of life are a part of God's creative design and could be expected to be found throughout the universe.
  3. Intelligent Design (ID):
    • Support for Design Hypothesis: Proponents of ID, who argue that life is too complex to have arisen without an intelligent cause, might interpret the discovery of life's building blocks on Mars as further evidence of a purposeful design by an intelligent entity. They could argue that life's building blocks being present on multiple planets supports the idea of a designed and purposeful universe.
    • New Arguments for Design: ID proponents might develop new arguments or refine existing ones to account for the distribution of life's building blocks, using this discovery to bolster their claims about the prevalence of design in the universe.
  4. Progressive Creationism:
    • Alignment with Existing Beliefs: Progressive creationists, who believe that God intervened at various points to create new forms of life, might view the presence of life's building blocks on Mars as part of God's creative process. They could argue that these building blocks were placed there as part of a divine plan that includes multiple planets.
    • Divine Purpose and Planning: This perspective might emphasize the idea that God's creative work extends beyond Earth, highlighting a divine purpose that includes the entire cosmos.
  5. Theistic Evolution:
    • Compatibility with Science: Theistic evolutionists, who believe that God works through the process of evolution, would likely see the discovery as consistent with their view that the natural processes observed by science are the means through which God creates life. They might argue that finding life's building blocks on Mars is evidence of the widespread potential for life in the universe, as part of God's natural order.
    • Reinforcement of Universal Creation: This perspective might interpret the discovery as reinforcing the idea that life is a fundamental aspect of God's creation and that the potential for life exists throughout the universe.
In summary, while the discovery of the building blocks for living systems on Mars would challenge some specific creationist views, it would also offer an opportunity for reinterpretation and integration within other creationist frameworks. The response would vary depending on the particular beliefs and theological interpretations of each creationist perspective.

Is it the act of an intelligent creator to create the building blocks of life on a planet such as Mars which is singularly unsuitable for life as we know it to exist on?

The question of whether it is the act of an intelligent creator to create the building blocks of life on a planet such as Mars, which is currently unsuitable for life as we know it, can be approached from various perspectives, each influenced by different theological, philosophical, and scientific viewpoints. Here are several possible interpretations:
  1. Testing Grounds for Life:
    • Perspective: Some might argue that an intelligent creator could place the building blocks of life on Mars as a kind of experiment or preparation for life that might develop under different conditions.
    • Rationale: This could be seen as a way for the creator to ensure that the building blocks of life are universally distributed, giving life the potential to arise in diverse environments, possibly under conditions that we do not yet fully understand or recognize.
  2. Part of a Larger Plan:
    • Perspective: From a theological standpoint, the presence of life's building blocks on Mars might be interpreted as part of a grander divine plan that extends beyond our current understanding of habitability.
    • Rationale: Proponents of this view might suggest that Mars could have been more suitable for life in the past or could become suitable again in the future, or that these building blocks serve a purpose in ways that are not immediately apparent to us.
  3. Evidence of Universal Design:
    • Perspective: Some advocates of intelligent design or creationism might see the widespread distribution of life's building blocks as evidence of a purposeful design by an intelligent creator.
    • Rationale: This perspective might hold that the creator designed the universe with the potential for life in various forms, and that the presence of these building blocks on Mars reflects the creator's intention for life to potentially arise or be studied in different environments.
  4. Scientific Explanation with Theistic Interpretation:
    • Perspective: Theistic evolutionists or those who integrate science and faith might view the presence of life's building blocks on Mars as a natural consequence of the laws and processes set in motion by a creator.
    • Rationale: They might argue that life's building blocks are naturally distributed by processes such as asteroid impacts, comets, or interplanetary dust, which are part of the universe's design. This distribution could be seen as evidence of a universe finely tuned to produce and support life.
  5. Philosophical and Existential Considerations:
    • Perspective: From a philosophical standpoint, the discovery might provoke questions about the nature of life and the conditions necessary for it, expanding our understanding of what it means for a planet to be "suitable" for life.
    • Rationale: This could lead to a broader consideration of life as a phenomenon that might not be confined to Earth-like conditions, suggesting that the creator's intentions might encompass a wider variety of life forms and habitats than we currently imagine.
In conclusion, the interpretation of an intelligent creator placing the building blocks of life on Mars depends heavily on one's worldview. Some may see it as a sign of a larger, incomprehensible plan or an evidence of a designed and purposeful universe, while others may integrate it into a scientific framework that does not necessarily require direct divine intervention. The suitability of Mars for life as we know it might be less relevant in these discussions than the broader implications of finding life's precursors beyond Earth.

In other words, it must be intelligently designed because it was designed by an intelligent designer? Is that a rational argument?

The argument that "it must be intelligently designed because it was designed by an intelligent designer" is an example of a circular argument. In logic, a circular argument is one in which the conclusion is assumed in one of the premises. Here's a breakdown of why this is considered circular and why it may not be rational:

Structure of the Argument
  1. Premise: The building blocks of life on Mars are intelligently designed.
  2. Conclusion: Therefore, they were designed by an intelligent designer.
In this structure, the premise assumes what it is trying to prove (i.e., that the building blocks are intelligently designed).

Rational Evaluation
  1. Begging the Question: This argument begs the question because it assumes the conclusion within the premise. For an argument to be rational and persuasive, it should provide independent support for its conclusion rather than assume it from the outset.
  2. Lack of Independent Evidence: For the argument to be rational, it would need to provide independent evidence or reasoning to support the claim that the building blocks of life on Mars were designed by an intelligent designer. This might include evidence of complexity that cannot be explained by natural processes, specific patterns that indicate design, or other empirical data that suggest intelligent intervention.
  3. Alternative Explanations: A rational argument should also consider and address alternative explanations. In this case, it should examine naturalistic explanations for the presence of life's building blocks on Mars, such as abiogenesis, panspermia, or chemical processes that could occur without intelligent intervention.
How to Make a Rational Argument for Intelligent Design

To construct a more rational argument for the intelligent design of the building blocks of life on Mars, one could:
  1. Present Empirical Evidence: Provide specific examples of features or characteristics of the building blocks that strongly suggest design over natural processes. This might include irreducible complexity or specified complexity that natural processes cannot easily account for.
  2. Demonstrate the Inadequacy of Natural Explanations: Show why natural processes (e.g., chemical evolution, random molecular interactions) are insufficient to account for the building blocks' presence and complexity.
  3. Use Inference to the Best Explanation: Argue that intelligent design is the best explanation among competing hypotheses based on the evidence available. This involves comparing the explanatory power and scope of intelligent design versus naturalistic explanations.
Example of a Rational Argument

An example of a more rational argument might look like this:
  1. Premise 1: The building blocks of life exhibit patterns and complexities (e.g., molecular structures, chirality) that are highly unlikely to arise through known natural processes.
  2. Premise 2: Such patterns and complexities are best explained by the action of an intelligent cause, as they resemble known products of intelligence (e.g., human-engineered molecules).
  3. Conclusion: Therefore, it is reasonable to infer that the building blocks of life on Mars were designed by an intelligent cause.
This argument provides premises that can be independently evaluated and supports the conclusion with evidence rather than assuming it.

In summary, the assertion that "it must be intelligently designed because it was designed by an intelligent designer" is circular and not rational by itself. A rational argument would need to provide independent evidence and reasoning to support the conclusion of intelligent design.

Wouldn't one need to provide empirical evidence a priori that an entity capable of designing anything actually exists, otherwise is should be pared away using Occam's Razor.

Yes, according to principles of logical reasoning and empirical investigation, providing empirical evidence that an entity capable of designing anything exists is essential for the argument of intelligent design to be robust. Additionally, Occam's Razor, which favors simpler explanations with fewer assumptions, would suggest that without such evidence, the hypothesis of an intelligent designer should be set aside in favor of naturalistic explanations that do not require the introduction of additional, unproven entities. Here’s a more detailed examination:

Empirical Evidence of an Intelligent Designer

To argue convincingly for intelligent design, one must:
  1. Demonstrate the Existence of the Designer: Present empirical evidence or a logically coherent argument that an intelligent designer exists. This might include evidence from cosmology, biology, or other fields that point to the presence of a designing intelligence.
  2. Show Capability and Action: Provide evidence that this designer has the capability to create life and has acted to do so. This would involve showing that the designer has the necessary attributes (such as intelligence, power, and intention) and has indeed performed acts of creation or design.

Application of Occam's Razor

Occam's Razor is a heuristic tool that helps to eliminate unnecessary assumptions:
  1. Naturalistic Explanations: If naturalistic explanations (such as abiogenesis, chemical evolution, or panspermia) can account for the presence of life’s building blocks without invoking an intelligent designer, then these explanations are generally preferred. They do not require assuming the existence of an additional entity.
  2. Parsimony: The principle of parsimony suggests that we should not multiply entities beyond necessity. Therefore, if the existence of an intelligent designer is not empirically demonstrated and is not necessary to explain the phenomenon, it should be excluded from the explanation.

Example of Applying Occam's Razor

Consider two hypotheses to explain the presence of life’s building blocks on Mars:
  1. Naturalistic Hypothesis: The building blocks of life are the result of chemical processes that occur naturally in the universe, possibly delivered via meteorites or formed through planetary processes.
  2. Intelligent Design Hypothesis: An intelligent designer placed the building blocks of life on Mars.
Evaluation:
  • Naturalistic Hypothesis: This requires the assumption that natural chemical processes can produce life’s building blocks, which is supported by scientific evidence and does not require additional assumptions about the existence of an intelligent entity.
  • Intelligent Design Hypothesis: This requires the assumption of an intelligent designer, whose existence and capabilities must be independently verified. Without empirical evidence of such a designer, this hypothesis adds an unnecessary layer of complexity.
Using Occam’s Razor, the naturalistic hypothesis is preferred because it is simpler and relies on fewer assumptions.

Conclusion

For the intelligent design hypothesis to be considered rational and preferable:
  1. Empirical Evidence Required: There must be empirical evidence for the existence of an intelligent designer capable of creating life’s building blocks.
  2. Simplicity and Parsimony: In the absence of such evidence, the hypothesis should be set aside in favor of simpler, naturalistic explanations that do not require additional, unproven entities.

Therefore, without prior empirical evidence of an intelligent designer, the hypothesis of intelligent design is less favored by Occam's Razor compared to naturalistic explanations.
But find it they have, or at least the 'smoking gun' that shows the basic building blocks for organic molecules existed on the early Mars. How the team of scientists from the University of Copenhagen did so is the subject of an open access research aper in Nature Geoscience and a detailed news release from Copenhagen University.

Before continuing, any creationists preparing to dismiss this with their traditional 'God did it! parrot squawk would be well advided to read the panel on the right, especially the final section on a priori evidence and the use of Occam's Razor.

Organic material from Mars reveals the likely origin of life’s building blocks
Mars Two samples from Mars together deliver the "smoking gun" in a new study showing the origin of Martian organic material. The study presents solid evidence for a prediction made over a decade ago by University of Copenhagen researchers that could be key to understanding how organic molecules, the foundation of life, were first formed here on Earth.
In a meteor crater on the red planet, a solitary robot is moving about. Right now it is probably collecting soil samples with a drill and a robotic arm, as it has quite a habit of doing. NASA's Curiosity rover has been active on Mars as the extended arm of science for nearly 12 years, and it continues to make discoveries that surprise and challenge scientists' understanding of both Mars and our own world here on Earth.

Facts: Organic material

The sample found on Mars contains deposits of so-called organic material.

To laymen this may sound more exciting than it is. Organic material in a chemical context does not necessarily mean something living, as one might normally think. The term covers molecules that contain carbon and at least one other element and can easily exist without life. These molecules are rather the building blocks of life.


Most recently, the discovery of sedimentary organic material with particular properties has had many researchers scratching their heads. The properties of these carbon-based materials, in particular the ratio of its carbon isotopes, surprised researchers.

Organic materials with such properties, if found on Earth, would typically be a sign of microorganisms, but they can also be the result of non-biological, chemical processes. The find obviously had researchers scrambling for a clear answer, but nothing seemed to fit.

However, for the research collaboration behind a study published in Nature Geoscience, there has been little hair scratching and much enthusiasm.

In fact, the discovery on Mars provided the missing piece that made everything fall into place for this group of researchers from the University of Copenhagen and the Tokyo Institute of Technology.

As co-author and chemistry professor Matthew Johnson puts it, it is "the smoking gun" needed to confirm a decade old theory of his about so-called photolysis in Mars' atmosphere.

With the Curiosity sample, the new research is able to prove with reasonable certainty that the Sun broke down \(\small\ce{CO2}\) in the Martian atmosphere billions of years ago - as the old theory predicted. And that the resulting carbon monoxide gradually reacted with other chemicals in the atmosphere synthesizing complex molecules – and thus providing Mars with organic materials.

Facts: What is Photolysis

Photolysis means that the Sun's UV rays provide molecules with energy to perform a chemical transformation. According to the research this happened in the Martian atmosphere, where 20% of \(\small\ce{CO2}\) molecules there were split into oxygen and carbon monoxide.

In earlier research, Johnson and colleagues showed that carbon dioxide containing the carbon-12 isotope is photolysed more quickly than the heavier isotope carbon-13. Over time, \(\small\ce{CO}\) is produced that is depleted in \(\small\ce{^13C}\), and \(\small\ce{^13C}\) builds up in the remaining \(\small\ce{CO2}\). This results in so-called isotopic enrichment in \(\small\ce{CO2}\) and depletion in \(\small\ce{CO}\), like mirror images or each other or the two halves of a broken plate.

It is the fractionation ratio in carbon, which serves as evidence of photolysis in the two samples from Mars.


Such carbon-based complex molecules are the prerequisite of life, the building blocks of life one might say. So, this it is a bit like the old debate about which came first, the chicken or the egg. We show that the organic material found on Mars has been formed through atmospheric photochemical reactions - without life that is. This is the 'egg', a prerequisite of life. It still remains to be shown whether or not this organic material resulted in life on the Red Planet. Additionally because Earth, Mars and Venus had very similar \(\small\ce{CO2}\) rich atmospheres long ago when this photolysis took place, it can also prove important for our understanding of how life began on Earth.

Professor Matthew Johnson, co-author
Department of Chemistry
University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.


Two pieces separated by 50 Million Kilometers – one puzzle solved

12 years ago Johnson and two colleagues used simulations based on quantum mechanics to determine what happens when a \(\small\ce{CO2}\) rich atmosphere is exposed to the UV-light of the Sun, in a process known as photolysis.

Facts: Isotopes Have Different Weights

Isotopes are variants of the same element that have different weights because the nucleus contains more or fewer neutrons.

Carbon has two stable isotopes - Normally, about 99% of carbon has 6 protons and 6 neutrons in its nucleus (\(\small\ce{^12C}\)). About 1% has 6 protons and 7 neutrons instead (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)). The ratio can serve as a chemical fingerprint revealing what reactions the carbon has undergone.

Photolysis favors carbon-12, and a high concentration of the isotope can therefore indicate this process.


Basically, on Mars around 20% of the \(\small\ce{CO2}\) is split into oxygen and carbon monoxide. But carbon has two stable isotopes: carbon-12 and carbon-13. Usually they are present in a ratio of one carbon-13 for every 99 carbon-12. However, photolysis works faster for the lighter carbon-12, so the carbon monoxide produced by photolysis has less carbon-13 (is depleted), and the left over \(\small\ce{CO2}\) has more (is enriched). Because of this, Johnson and his colleagues were able to make very precise predictions of the ratio of carbon isotopes after photolysis. And this gave them two distinctive fingerprints to look for. One of these was identified in a different Martian sample, years ago.

We actually have a piece of Mars here on Earth, which was knocked off that planet by a meteorite, and then became one itself, when it landed here on Earth. This meteorite, called Allan Hills 84001 for the place in Antarctica where it was found, contains carbonate minerals that form from \(\small\ce{CO2}\) in the atmosphere. The smoking gun here is that the ratio of carbon isotopes in it exactly matches our predictions in the quantum chemical simulations, but there was a missing piece in the puzzle. We were missing the other product of this chemical process to confirm the theory, and that's what we've now obtained.

Professor Matthew Johnson.


Extra Info: The Famous Mars Meteorite

The discovery of organic sediments on Mars with a low ratio of carbon-13 completes the puzzle of empirical evidence for the photolysis theory, since researchers already found the other part of that puzzle years ago in the famous meteorite, Allan Hills 84001. The meteorite contains carbonate with a heightened concentration of heavy carbon 13 isotopes.

Discovered in Antarctica 40 years ago by Roberta Score, the meteorite is believed to originate from the Red Planet and became particularly well known because it contains some deposits that led NASA researchers to announce in 1996 that they believed they had found traces of microscopic fossils of bacteria from Mars.

Today, the consensus is that these deposits are abiotic - that is, stemming from non-biological processes.


The carbon in the Allan Hills meteorite is enriched in carbon-13, which makes it the mirror image of the depletion in carbon-13 that has now been measured in the organic material found by Curiousity on Mars.

The new study has thus linked data from two samples, which researchers believe have the same origin in Mars' childhood but were found more than 50 million kilometers apart.

There is no other way to explain both the carbon-13 depletion in the organic material and the enrichment in the Martian meteorite, both relative to the composition of volcanic \(\small\ce{CO2}\) emitted on Mars, which has a constant composition, similar as for Earth’s volcanos, and serves as a baseline.

Professor Matthew Johnson.


Hope to find the same evidence on Earth

Because the organic material contains this isotopic “fingerprint” of where it came from, researchers are able to trace the source of the carbon in the organic material to the carbon monoxide formed by photolysis in the atmosphere. But this also reveals a lot about what happened to it in between.
Facts: The oxygen painted Mars red

Photolysis of a \(\small\ce{CO2}\) molecule yields carbon monoxide (\(\small\ce{CO}\)) and an oxygen atom (\(\small\ce{O}\)). On Mars, only carbon monoxide remains, which is transformed into the organic material found by the Curiosity rover.

But where the oxygen has gone is also no secret. The oxygen combines into \(\small\ce{O2}\), which interacts with iron on Mars' surface. The Red Planet is rust red due to oxidized iron.


This shows that carbon monoxide is the starting point for the synthesis of organic molecules in these kinds of atmospheres. So we have an important conclusion about the origin of life’s building blocks. Although so far only on Mars.

Professor Matthew Johnson.


Researchers hope to find the same isotopic evidence on Earth, but this has yet to happen, and it could be a much bigger challenge because our geological development has changed the surface significantly compared to Mars, Johnson explains.

It is reasonable to assume that the photolysis of \(\small\ce{CO2}\) was also a prerequisite for the emergence of life here on Earth, in all its complexity. But we have not yet found this “smoking gun” material here on Earth to prove that the process took place. Perhaps because Earth's surface is much more alive, geologically and literally, and therefore constantly changing. But it is a big step that we have now found it on Mars, from a time when the two planets were very similar.

Professor Matthew Johnson.


Extra info: Mars, Earth, and Venus Had the Same Atmosphere

According to researchers, Earth had approximately the same atmosphere as our neighboring planets Mars and Venus billions of years ago.

When the early planets Venus, Earth, and Mars eventually formed solid surfaces, researchers believe they began to release large amounts of \(\small\ce{CO2}\) from extreme volcanic activity. That's how they formed their first atmospheres with large concentrations of the gas. Oxygen had not yet become part of the atmosphere; this happened later on Earth, after the emergence of life.

The photolysis theory states that UV rays from the sun then start a chain of chemical reactions. A chain that starts with the breakdown of \(\small\ce{CO2}\) into carbon monoxide, which is the building block for a multitude of other chemical compounds.

Thus, with the help of the Sun, the foundation for the many carbon compounds and complex molecules we have today was formed - in the case of Earth, the foundation for life.

Since then the fate of the three planets has been significantly different. Earth's carbon dioxide reacted with our large amount of surface water and much of it deposited over time as carbonate rocks like limestone, leaving the atmosphere dominated by nitrogen, as we have today. Life arose, and microorganisms produced oxygen, which, among other things, created our ozone layer, while Mars and Venus still have very \(\small\ce{CO2}\)-dominant atmospheres today.

Professor Matthew Johnson.


Today, Venus has a very dense and toxic atmosphere primarily of \(\small\ce{CO2}\) which gives it a surface temperature of around 450 degrees Celsius. On Mars, the atmosphere has become much thinner compared to Earth's, and has left a desert landscape.


About the new study:

The study is published in Nature Geoscience and has just appeared in the journal's June issue. The following researchers have contributed to the new study:

From the Department of Chemistry at the University of Copenhagen:

Matthew S. Johnson and Johan A. Schmidt

From the Tokyo Institute of Technology:

Yuichiro Ueno, Xiaofeng Zang, Alexis Gilbert, Hiroyuki Kurokawa and Tomohiro Usui

From the University of Tokyo and the Royal Belgian Institute of Space Aeronomy:

Shohei Aoki
Abstract
Organic matter found in early Martian sediment may yield clues to the planet’s environmental conditions, prebiotic chemistry and habitability, but its origin remains unclear. Strong (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)) depletion in sedimentary organic matter at Gale crater was recently detected by the Curiosity rover. Although this enigmatic depletion remains debated, if correct, a mechanism to cause such strong (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)) depletion is required. Here we show from \(\small\ce{CO2}\) photolysis experiments and theoretical considerations that solar ultraviolet photolysis of \(\small\ce{CO2}\) in a reducing atmosphere can yield strongly (\(\small\ce{^13C}\))-depleted \(\small\ce{CO}\). We suggest that atmospheric synthesis of organic compounds from photolysis-produced \(\small\ce{CO}\) is a plausible mechanism to explain the source of isotopically depleted organic matter in early Martian sediments. Furthermore, this mechanism could explain (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)) enrichment of early Martian \(\small\ce{CO2}\) without requiring long-term carbon escape into space. A mass balance model calculation using our estimated isotopic fractionation factor indicates the conversion of approximately 20% of volcanic \(\small\ce{CO2}\) emissions on early Mars into organics via \(\small\ce{CO}\), consistent with the available data for carbon isotopes of carbonate. Although alternative pathways for organic compound production have been proposed, our findings suggest that considerable amounts of organic matter may have been synthesized from \(\small\ce{CO}\) in a reducing early Martian atmosphere and deposited in sediments.

Main
Organic matter on Mars is important for understanding the habitability of the planet, prebiotic chemistry and the search for life in the universe. A series of analyses using the Sample Analysis at Mars (SAM) instrument on board the Curiosity rover discovered and confirmed that there is sedimentary organic matter preserved in circa 3.5-billion-year-old water-lain sediment at the Gale crater on Mars1,2,3,4. Furthermore, recent analysis of SAM data revealed that this organic matter has an enigmatic stable carbon isotope composition \(\small\delta^{13}\text{C}_{\text{VPDB}}\) values [\(\small\equiv 1000 \left( \left( \frac{^{13}\text{C}}{^{12}\text{C}} \right)_{\text{sample}} \bigg/ \left( \frac{^{13}\text{C}}{^{12}\text{C}} \right)_{\text{VPDB}} - 1 \right)\)] from −137‰ to +22‰) (refs. 5,6,7,8,9), some of which are strongly depleted in (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)) to an extent never found in Earth’s sedimentary rocks6. Although some in situ isotope analyses have been contaminated by a terrestrial material mixed into the SAM instrument3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10, even taking this into account, it appears that several early Martian sediments contain organic carbon with \(\small\delta^{13}\text{C}_{\text{VPDB}}\) values at least less than −70‰ (ref. 10) and possibly down to −137 ± 8‰ (refs. 6,8) (Supplementary Note provide details). The origin of this strong (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)) depletion remains uncertain but may arise from cosmic, biological or abiological processes4,5,6. Interplanetary dust may include carbon particles with strong (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)) depletion11 and might have accumulated in the sediment6, although the signal from outside the solar system would easily be diluted if indigenous carbon sources were available from biotic or abiotic processes on Mars. Some biological metabolic pathways, particularly methanotrophy, can induce large isotopic fractionation, but it is difficult to explain \(\small\delta^{13}\text{C}_{\text{VPDB}}\) < −100‰ in light of known biological fractionation factors6. In principle, the organic matter in early Martian sediment could be due to abiotic reactions such as Fischer–Tropsch-type reactions2,6 or electro-chemical reduction of \(\small\ce{CO2}\)5,6,12, but none of these mechanisms are known to produce the large carbon isotopic fractionations observed (ref. 6 and references therein). An alternative source of organic matter is atmospheric synthesis5,6,13,14,15,16. Theoretically, atmospheric photochemistry under the appropriate conditions may produce a large carbon isotopic fractionation14,15,17. Ab initio calculations using time-dependent wavepacket propagation of the absorption cross sections of \(\small\ce{CO2}\) isotopologues17 predicted that solar UV photolysis of \(\small\ce{CO2}\) yields strongly (\(\small\ce{^13C}\))-depleted \(\small\ce{CO}\), potentially lower than −100‰ (Fig. 1). However, the large isotope effect has not yet been verified by laboratory experiment17,18.
Fig. 1: Wavelength-dependent isotopic fractionation of \(\small\ce{CO2}\) photolysis.
Preferential dissociation of \(\small\ce{^12CO2}\) against \(\small\ce{^13CO2}\) is expected in a wavelength region from 170 nm to 200 nm, which is responsible for solar UV photolysis of \(\small\ce{CO2}\). a, Actinic UV spectra. Red: solar spectrum from ref. 43. Blue: calculated spectrum at 30 km altitude (alt.) of model early Mars (10 mbar \(\small\ce{CO2}\) at surface) (Methods). Black: measured UV spectrum of the high pressure Xe lamp used in the laboratory experiment (Methods). b, Calculated absorption cross sections of \(\small\ce{^12CO2}\) (black) and \(\small\ce{^13CO2}\) (orange) at 295 K from ref. 17. c, Calculated isotope effect (1,000 ln α1) as a function of wavelength for the 295 K absorption spectra. Results were averaged over a 1 nm (black) and 5 nm (red) windows. Oxygen isotopic fractionation and its implications for Mars atmosphere were given elsewhere17.
Explaining the origin of the strong (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)) depletion becomes even more problematic considering that the early carbonate precipitate in the approximately 4 billion years old (4 Ga) Martian meteorite ALH 84001 was rather enriched in (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)) (up to +55‰) (refs. 19,20,21) relative to Mars mantle carbon (\(\small\delta^{13}\text{C}_{\text{VPDB}}\) = −25 ± 5‰) (ref. 22) (Methods). For present-day Mars, the (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)) enrichment of atmospheric \(\small\ce{CO2}\) (\(\small\delta^{13}\text{C}_{\text{VPDB}}\) = +46 ± 4‰) (ref. 23) has been thought to result from carbon escape into space14,24,25 through the 4-billion-year history of Mars. However, even assuming the 4 Ga carbonate were in equilibrium with the atmospheric \(\small\ce{CO2}\), its \(\small\delta^{13}\text{C}_{\text{VPDB}}\) value should have already been enriched in (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)) ( + 20 ± 10‰) at that time (Methods provide details). It is problematic to understand whether several hundred million years after formation of Martian atmosphere, enough time has passed to create the (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)) enrichment of \(\small\ce{CO2}\) only via carbon escape into space14,25. Furthermore, based on geomagnetic observations26, early Mars probably had a geomagnetic field before 4 Ga. The geomagnetic field on early Mars could have prevented solar winds from interacting with ions in the upper atmosphere and shielded the neutral atmosphere from sputtering loss. Robust magnetic shielding of the atmosphere before 4 Ga is supported by observations of low-fractionated atmospheric argon (\(\small\ce{^38Ar}\)/\(\small\ce{^36Ar}\)) and nitrogen (\(\small\ce{^15N}\)/\(\small\ce{^14N}\)) recorded in ALH 8400127,28. Therefore, (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)) enrichment of Mars’ early carbonate is still enigmatic and may have been caused by other fractionation processes14,25,29. Here we present a new laboratory experiment and quantum theoretical and model calculations that demonstrate how solar UV photolysis of \(\small\ce{CO2}\) and subsequent organic synthesis from atmospheric \(\small\ce{CO}\) could explain both the strong (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)) depletion in the organic matter and the (\(\small\ce{^13C}\)) enrichment of \(\small\ce{CO2}\). A previous \(\small\ce{CO2}\) photolysis experiment18 was conducted using an ultraviolet light source with a confined wavelength at 184.9 nm, which does not simulate the actual fractionation that occurs in a planetary atmosphere where the expected isotope effect depends on the broad distribution of wavelengths of the actinic UV flux17 (Fig. 1). Therefore, we used a solar-like broadband UV source for \(\small\ce{CO2}\) photolysis (Fig. 1a) to confirm the large carbon isotope effect and quantify the actual fractionation factor associated with \(\small\ce{CO2}\) photolysis in the early Martian atmospheres.
It's going to be interesting watching creationists trying to ignore the evidence, that this finding establishes, that the natural creation of building blocks of life is not impossible nor even highly unlikely, but happens as readily as any other chemical reaction in the presense of inorganic molecules that were abundant on early Earth, as on early Mars. No god-magic required.
Advertisement

What Makes You So Special? From The Big Bang To You

How did you come to be here, now? This books takes you from the Big Bang to the evolution of modern humans and the history of human cultures, showing that science is an adventure of discovery and a source of limitless wonder, giving us richer and more rewarding appreciation of the phenomenal privilege of merely being alive and able to begin to understand it all.

Available in Hardcover, Paperback or ebook for Kindle

Advertisement

Ten Reasons To Lose Faith: And Why You Are Better Off Without It

This book explains why faith is a fallacy and serves no useful purpose other than providing an excuse for pretending to know things that are unknown. It also explains how losing faith liberates former sufferers from fear, delusion and the control of others, freeing them to see the world in a different light, to recognise the injustices that religions cause and to accept people for who they are, not which group they happened to be born in. A society based on atheist, Humanist principles would be a less divided, more inclusive, more peaceful society and one more appreciative of the one opportunity that life gives us to enjoy and wonder at the world we live in.

Available in Hardcover, Paperback or ebook for Kindle


Advertisement



Thank you for sharing!







submit to reddit

Sunday, 4 August 2024

Refuting Creationism - The Dynamics of a Forest Ecosystem - Or How LIfe Is Fine-Tuned For Its Environment


The impact of insect herbivory on biogeochemical cycling in broadleaved forests varies with temperature | US Forest Service Research and Development

An interesting piece of research by a large international team led by the Forest Service of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), has shown how herbivory by leaf-eating insects is part of a dynamic forest ecosystem, as the results of herbivory releases nutrients back into the soil from where they are recycled back into the forest canopy.

It is a lovely illustration of how, in contrast to what creationists claim is evidence that Earth is fine-tuned for life, it is actually life that fine tunes itself to fit the environment by an evolutionary process. There is nothing magical about it; it is simply the operation of basic laws of chemistry and physics, and the differential survival of those best fitted to live and reproduce within the ecosystem.

How the team did this research is the subject of an open access research paper in Nature Communications and is explained in a press release from USDA:

Saturday, 3 August 2024

Refuting Creationism - What Caused The Transition From Ediacaran To Cambrian Biota? It's The Environment, Of Course


Artist's impression of the Ediacaran fauna
Sea level changes shaped early life on Earth, fossils show | The University of Edinburgh

What creationists will tell you about the Cambrian 'Explosion', i.e., the rapid radiation of different species with different body plans, is that it happened in an instant. One minute there was nothing; the next, lots of different species with lots of different body plans were swimming about eating one another and avoiding being eaten. This is a parody of course and depends on deliberately or otherwise, misunderstanding what the term 'Cambrian Explosion' means.

What it doesn't mean is that lots of different body plans suddenly appeared without ancestor and with no common ancestry. Creationist claims of spontaneous, magical creation are nonsense, of course. Not only did the Cambrian biota have ancestors, but those ancestors themselves had ancestors in the preceding 'Ediacaran' era, named after the Australian rocks in which their fossils were first found. And those Ediacaran multicellular organisms had ancestors in the form of single-celled organisms that gave rise to these colonial organisms.

What caused the transition from the sessile Ediacaran biota to the Cambrian biota was the evolution of mobility. Mobility creates the opportunity for predation so, unlike sessile organisms that depend on a supply of simple nutrients that have to be metabolized and make into structural materials, being able to predate on other organisms means they can obtain organic molecules already made by something else.

Friday, 2 August 2024

Refuting Creationism - How Worms Turned - Into Insects


Fig. 1: Anatomical overview of Youti yuanshi.
Ancient worm fossil solves mystery of how insects and spiders evolved - Durham University

To anyone who has ever looked at the segmented body of an annelid worm and the segmented body of an insect, particularly in its larval stage, that the latter is really the former with legs and (usually as an adult) wings should be obvious. The same can be said for annelid worms and centipedes and, for that matter, worms with legs and arachnids (spiders, scorpions and mites). But maybe the connection between arachnids and crabs or insects and barnacles is not so obvious, until you look at how the legs work and how they both have an exoskeleton instead of an endoskeleton like the vertebrates.

But then even the primitive ancestors of the vertebrates were segmented like the annelids, as we can see in the spinal column and the way nerves arise from the spinal cord.

But, tell a creationist that a segmented worm evolved into the arthropods, and they'll immediately demand to see the 'transitional' fossil, that they've been fooled into thinking must exist because every generation of every species is obliged to leave a fossil so there is a complete, unbroken record of evolution somewhere, because the Theory of Evolution says so. In fact, a complete, unbroken fossil record of every generation of an evolving species over time would look suspiciously like something other than chance was at work in creating fossils.

So, what we have are the snapshots at random points in time that are left in the geological column, and various dating methods that tell us how old the fossil is. The rest is simple common sense and joining the dots.

And one such snapshot has just been announced by researchers working at Durham University, UK, who have identified a species that is clearly partway between a segmented worm and an early arthropod (euarthropod). The newly-named Youti yuanshi is about the size of a poppy seed and fits neatly into one of creationism's beloved gaps. And, of course, it is exactly what the TOE predicts should have lived, because, as I said, the connection between segmented worms and segmented arthropods is obvious.

Unintelligent Design - Cancer in Birds - Malevolence, Incompetence or Evolution


Canada goose eggs, Branta canadensis
Chrislotos
ASU researchers explore cancer susceptibility in birds | ASU News

Researchers at Arizona State University (ASU) have discovered a statistical link between the incidence of cancer in birds and their reproductive rates. As species, birds that lay more eggs are more liable to die of cancer.

The team attribute this to an evolutionary tradeoff between reproduction and survival. Those species which are more susceptible to cancer - which is a function of aging as the longer an individual lives the greater are its chances of developing a cancer - have evolutionary pressure to produce more offspring while young, where as those with a lower susceptibility can afford to expend less energy in reproducing and to spread it over a longer average lifespan.

This is easily understood as the result of an evolutionary process, as are cancers, which result from mistakes in cell replication, which is a sub-optimal, utilitarian process in multicellular organisms with specialised cells and tissues, resulting from inheriting the same mechanism that single-celled ancestors used so the whole genome is replicated in every cell, regardless of which genes those specialized cells will need.

Refuting Creationism - How a Mass Extinction 66 Million Year Before Creation Week Triggered The Rappid Evolution Of Birds


The Northern Flicker, Colaptes auratus, is a member of the bird group Coraciimorphae. Berv and co-authors identify this group of birds and others as having close ties to the end-Cretaceous mass extinction that occurred in the wake of the Chicxulub asteroid impact approximately 66 million years ago.

Image credit: Daniel Field, University of Cambridge
Mass extinction 66 million years ago triggered rapid evolution of bird genomes | University of Michigan News

Another major milestone in the history of life on Earth happened, like almost everything else, in that long pre-Creation Week history that creationists need to ignore. It was the mass extinction about 66 million years ago that killed the non-avian dinosaurs and most megafauna, leaving vacant niches that could be exploited by the descendants of survivors. It's no surprise to anyone who understands how evolution works, that this led to a proliferation of new species as existing species diversified to fill those niches.

That much was known already from the fossil record, but now a University of Michigan study has found how this maps onto changes in the genome of the major bird families, as a kind of DNA fossil, just as the TOE predicts.

The major difference between the different taxons is how developed the chicks are on hatching and how dependent they are on their parents. In ducks, geese, the ratites and ground-nesting birds such as the plovers, chickens and turkeys, the chicks are mobile and able to feed themselves (precocial) almost as soon as they've hatched. At the other end of the scale, many passerines are helpless on hatching and are entirely dependent on their parents for food and shelter (altricial) for several weeks.

As the birds evolved and diversified, they tended to become smaller and also more altricial. This reduction in body size and increased altriciality are reflected in the genomes. It was these transitional changed that the researchers detected.

These major changes were occurring within 3-5 million years after the mass extinction.
Web Analytics