header pic

Area51 Board (non-moderated) at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' Scout-Tennessee a51 Crowd- Enjoy ROWDY discussion covering politics, religion, current events, and all things under the sun

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: Are Biologists Willing To Test Evolution?

 (Read 3142 times)

Brutus Buckeye

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 7297
  • Liked:
Re: Are Biologists Willing To Test Evolution?
« Reply #98 on: August 07, 2020, 05:20:07 PM »
What is the current version of man? The Chinese? The Russians? The Scientologists? 
1919, 20, 21, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42, 44
WWH: 1952, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 75
1979, 81, 82, 84, 87, 94, 98
2001, 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

highVOLtage

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 4133
  • Liked:
Re: Are Biologists Willing To Test Evolution?
« Reply #99 on: August 07, 2020, 05:33:25 PM »
but is there any doubt that there have been many types of archaic man that have evolved, existed for some amount of time, and ended up being wiped out by the current version of man?

It undoubtedly seems that the current version of man is actually devolving..


https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1287509143763300352

Volbrigade/oU

  • Player
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 840
  • Liked:
Re: Are Biologists Willing To Test Evolution?
« Reply #100 on: August 07, 2020, 05:51:20 PM »
It undoubtedly seems that the current version of man is actually devolving..


https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1287509143763300352
Now, now... "don't judge", Volt.

Oh, Lord...

"if we can just get rid of that archaic Jewish God, everything will be so wonderful...".

You're more right than you might know, Volt.  We actually are devolving.  Mutations -- which by the way, are deleterious; they don't turn microbes into men -- are piling up in our genome.

Always have been.  Further evidence that we ain't been around as long as the m2m-ers need us to be.

If that were the case, we'd be extinct by now.

https://creation.com/human-genome-decay-and-origin-of-life

ZenMode

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1093
  • Liked:
Re: Are Biologists Willing To Test Evolution?
« Reply #101 on: August 07, 2020, 05:56:40 PM »
What is the current version of man? The Chinese? The Russians? The Scientologists?
  • Homo habilis
  • Homo erectus
  • Homo neanderthalensis
  • Homo floresiensis
  • Homo naledi
  • Homo sapiens

« Last Edit: August 07, 2020, 06:14:18 PM by ZenMode »

Cincydawg

  • Ombudsman for the Secret Order of the Odd Fellows
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 35631
  • Liked:
Re: Are Biologists Willing To Test Evolution?
« Reply #102 on: August 07, 2020, 06:04:09 PM »
A major problem for Darwin back in the day was the age of the sun.  Nobody had a clue how it could be billions of years old, as would be necessary for Darwin's theory.

No less a personage than Lord Kelvin estimated its age at only 20 million years.  Later some thought it could be powered by radioactive decay, but that didn't work either.

It wasn't until the 1930s that the power of the sun became generally understood, which allowed its age to be at least consistent with Darwin's theory.

highVOLtage

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 4133
  • Liked:
Re: Are Biologists Willing To Test Evolution?
« Reply #103 on: August 07, 2020, 06:35:35 PM »
  • Homo habilis
  • Homo erectus
  • Homo neanderthalensis
  • Homo floresiensis
  • Homo naledi
  • Homo sapiens
  • Homo ignoramus

Brutus Buckeye

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 7297
  • Liked:
Re: Are Biologists Willing To Test Evolution?
« Reply #104 on: August 07, 2020, 11:25:47 PM »
  • Homo habilis
  • Homo erectus
  • Homo neanderthalensis
  • Homo floresiensis
  • Homo naledi
  • Homo sapiens


What is the average genetic distance between each of those classifications?
1919, 20, 21, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42, 44
WWH: 1952, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 75
1979, 81, 82, 84, 87, 94, 98
2001, 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 23049
  • Liked:
The Top Ten Scientific Problems with Biological and Chemical Evolution
« Reply #105 on: September 04, 2020, 06:01:07 PM »
Introduction

“There are no weaknesses in the theory of evolution.”[color=var(--csc-dark)]1[/iurl][/sup] Such was professed by Eugenie Scott, the de facto head of the Darwin lobby, while speaking to the media in response to the Texas State Board of Education’s 2009 vote to require students to learn about both the scientific evidence for and against neo-Darwinian evolution.[/font][/color]
For those who follow the debate over origins, Dr. Scott’s words are as unsurprising as they are familiar. It seems that almost on a daily basis, we find the news media quoting evolutionary scientists declaring that materialist accounts of biological and chemical evolution are “fact.” Students who take college-preparatory or college-level courses on evolution are warned that doubting Darwinism is tantamount to committing intellectual suicide — you might as well proclaim the Earth is flat.[color=var(--csc-dark)]2[/iurl][/sup] Such bullying is enough to convince many that it’s much easier on your academic standing, your career, and your reputation to just buy into Darwinism. The few holdouts who remain are intimidated into silence.[/font][/color]
But is it true that there are “no weaknesses” in evolutionary theory? Are those who express doubts about Darwinism displaying courage, or are they fools that want to take us back to the dark ages and era of the flat Earth?[color=var(--csc-dark)]3[/iurl][/sup] Thankfully, it’s very easy to test these questions: all one must do is examine the technical scientific literature and inquire whether there are legitimate scientific challenges to chemical and biological evolution.[/font][/color]
This chapter will review some of this literature, and show that there are numerous legitimate scientific challenges to core tenets of Darwinian theory, as well as predominant theories of chemical evolution. Those who harbor doubts about Darwinism need not be terrified by academic bullies who pretend there is no scientific debate to be had.



President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 23049
  • Liked:
Re: Are Biologists Willing To Test Evolution?
« Reply #106 on: September 08, 2020, 06:40:37 PM »
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 23049
  • Liked:
Ancient human DNA shows humans did not evolve from Neandertals
« Reply #107 on: September 12, 2020, 02:38:51 PM »
A new study has examined the mtDNA sequences of two Cro-Magnon specimens dated to 23,000 and 25,000 years old. One specimen (Paglicci-25) had no sequence differences from the modern reference sequence, and the other (Paglicci-12) only one substitution. It is remarkable that so little change in the sequence had occurred over the last 23,000 years. The ancient Cro-Magnon mtDNA and modern European mtDNA differed by only 2-3 base pairs on average (see table below). This difference is even less than that observed among modern Europeans! In contrast, these ancient modern humans differed from nearly contemporary Neandertals by an average of 24 base pairs.

mtDNA Sequence Variation Among Modern and Ancient Hominids
IndividualModern EuropeansNeandertals
MeanMin.Max.s.d.MeanMin.Max.s.d.
Paglicci-252.30111.824.523282.4
Paglicci-123.20101.723.522272.4
Modern Europeans4.40182.3----
According to the authors of the study:


"Although only six HVRI sequences of ancient a.m.h [anatomically modern humans] and four sequences of Neandertals are available to date, the sharp differentiation among them represents a problem for any model regarding the transition from archaic to modern humans as a process taking place within a single evolving human lineage."

Caramelli, D., C. Lalueza-Fox, C. Vernesi, M. Lari, A. Casoli, F. Mallegnii, B. Chiarelli, I. Dupanloup, J. Bertranpetit, G. Barbujani, and G. Bertorelle. 2003. Evidence for a genetic discontinuity between Neandertals and 24,000-year-old anatomically modern Europeans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 100: 6593-6597.


President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 23049
  • Liked:
The Adequacy of the Fossil Record
« Reply #108 on: October 03, 2020, 05:44:07 PM »
Evolutionists have used the excuse that the fossil record is not complete enough to be an accurate representation of the history of life on the Earth. A recent book, The Adequacy of the Fossil Record (Donovan, S.K. and C.R.C. Paul, eds. 1998. The Adequacy of the Fossil Record. Wiley, Chichester, UK), examined the fossil record in terms of its completeness, bias (over and under representation of certain species and groups of organisms), and stratigraphic range (its completeness for a species over the entire history of its existence). Their conclusions were that the fossil record is surprisingly complete, with about 10% of all species that have ever lived being represented. There are some biases and stratigraphic incompleteness in the fossil record, but these problems can be estimated mathematically from the available data. There are many examples of stratigraphic gaps in the fossil record, with these gaps being the rule rather than the exception. In the past, it has been assumed that the gaps represent incompleteness of the fossil record. The authors suggest the "heretical" view that stratigraphic data should be used to test the phylogenetic relationships between species rather than assume that the relationships exist and that the fossil record is incomplete.

Baumiller, T.K. 1999. Enough remains to work with. Science 283: 1271.
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 23049
  • Liked:
Applied Intelligent Design:Engineers Know Engineering When They See It
« Reply #109 on: October 04, 2020, 01:35:30 PM »
Engineers of all types (e.g., mechanical, electrical, hydraulic, civil, software) are focused on how to get things to work. They need to pull together all that is known about materials and properties, and organize them to perform a function. They need to meet design requirements: a company or government says “Here is what we need to do; how can we get it done within the limits of cost and time available?” Knowledge of engineering principles grows as the needs of a society grow, often becoming more sophisticated, pushing the boundaries of know-how. Engineers are trained to see design and judge good design.
Human engineers must also navigate intellectual property laws, because many engineers want to patent their designs and protect them from theft. There’s a lot of angst going on in America on this very issue. China and other countries are accused of stealing our intellectual property, which can have not only economic but national security consequences. But who owns the patent on a leaf, or a coral? Engineers don’t know, and they don’t care. Perhaps that’s part of what makes biomimetics so popular. They see a good design, and they can copy it without violating any laws. 
Take materials science. Engineers are always looking for better materials with which to make prosthetic devices, adhesives, tools that are flexible yet strong, and many other things. They see successful materials in nature, and can measure their performance characteristics, which is great: engineering is big on measurement. Who is going to sue them if they try to mimic the material? Nobody. It’s a winning strategy, and it drives science forward. It drives biologists and engineers to understand the organism, and it gives engineers measurable design principles to strive for.
Let’s take a look at specific organisms that produce very enviable materials, and learn how knowledge about the organisms is leading to superior designs for human productivity.
Fish Scale Electronics
America can’t sue China for using fish technology. [color=var(--csc-primary)]New Scientist[/iurl] says that the materials in fish scales have desirable properties:[/font][/size][/color]
Quote
Fish scales could provide an eco-friendly alternative to plastic for use in flexible displays for electronic devices.
Flexibility is important for wearable electronics to enable the creation of displays that bend, fold or twist easily, says Hai-Dong Yu at Nanjing Tech University in China. Plastic has been the go-to material for achieving this kind of flexibility but because of its harmful impact on the environment, sustainable, low-cost alternatives are highly sought after. [Emphasis added.]
Think of all the fish parts that go to waste in seafood. Consumers don’t like to eat the skin, but that wasted material adds up to two million tons globally each year — material that is flexible, low-cost, and eco-friendly. That gave engineers at Nanjing Tech University an idea:
Quote
The team extracted gelatin from fish scales and used this to create an extremely thin film. Tiny silver nanowires were then incorporated into it, to act as electrodes, along with a light-emitting material made of zinc sulphide and copper, to provide light for the electronic display.
The researchers see green in more ways than one. The material is ideal for low-cost, temporary electronic displays that could be marketed (score one for green) and are biodegradable after just 24 days in soil (score two for green). Plastic displays, by contrast, could take centuries to break down. 
The [color=var(--csc-primary)]American Chemical Society[/iurl] (ACS) points out that this kind of flexible material could be applied in single-use applications. “Flexible temporary electronic displays may one day make it possible to sport a glowing tattoo or check a reading, like that of a stopwatch, directly on the skin.” The Nanjing University engineers deserve credit, but ultimately, it is the fish that should arouse our admiration. They come designed to produce this ideal material in ways we cannot yet fully understand. [/font][/size][/color]
Leaf Technology
Inspired by leaves, engineers at [color=var(--csc-primary)]Northwestern University[/iurl] have come up with a way to reduce frost on any surface by 60 percent or more without electrical power. Reducing frost formation is important for airplanes, windows and machinery. How do leaves do it?[/font][/size][/color]
Quote
This idea came from looking at leaves,” said Northwestern’s Kyoo-Chul (Ken) Park, who led the study. “There is more frost formation on the convex regions of a leaf. On the concave regions (the veins), we see much less frost. We found that it’s the geometry — not the material — that controls this.”
Butterfly Black
Some materials need to absorb as much light as possible. It would be great to do this without paint. [color=var(--csc-primary)]Duke University[/iurl] announced a discovery by its engineers: “To Make Ultra-Black Materials That Won’t Weigh Things Down, Consider the Butterfly.” [/font][/size][/color]
Biologists at Duke studied butterflies from around the world that have black in their wings, and found that it wasn’t added melanin (a protein pigment) that made certain species ultra-black, but the geometry of the wing scales. The blackness is an illusion created by the micro-structure of the scale material. “Light goes into their scales, but very little of it bounces back out.”
Quote
Butterfly wings may look smooth to the naked eye. Up close it’s a different story. Magnified thousands of times, butterfly wings are covered in scales with a mesh-like surface of ridges and holes that channel light into the scale’s spongy interior. There, pillar-like beams of tissue scatter light until it is absorbed.
This 3-D geometry is so effective, you can coat it with gold and it still looks black. “You almost can’t make them shiny,” a team member remarked. How could this be used?
Quote
Ultimately, the findings could help engineers design thinner ultra-black coatings that reduce stray light without weighing things down, for applications ranging from military camouflage — for stealth aircraft that can’t be seen at night or detected by radar — to lining space telescopes aimed at faint, distant stars.
Some on the team want to figure out why this ability “evolved” numerous times in butterflies. It’s unlikely that soldiers or stargazers will care about that.
Bone and Coral Tech
Another desirable property for materials is strength without weight. Bone and coral reefs are showing the way to researchers at [color=var(--csc-primary)]Johns Hopkins University[/iurl]. [/font][/size][/color]
Quote
Inspired by how human bone and colorful coral reefs adjust mineral deposits in response to their surrounding environments, Johns Hopkins researchers have created a self-adapting material that can change its stiffness in response to the applied force. This advancement can someday open the doors for materials that can self-reinforce to prepare for increased force or stop further damage.
Engineers have had difficulty fulfilling such design principles using synthetic materials. Natural materials like bone, coral and wood succeed because they have internal signaling systems that can resupply damaged parts with more material. That’s a tall order to imitate. So far, the Hopkins team working on this have made only a cheap imitation, using electrical charges that are activated by pressure as “signals” to draw more ions to the spot. 
Gecko Tech
Consumers have grown to love the robotic floor vacuums that clean the house on their own. Wouldn’t it be great if they could also clean the walls? [color=var(--csc-primary)]Georgia Institute of Technology[/iurl] invites us to consider wall-crawling vacuums using gecko-foot material.[/font][/size][/color]
The adhesive properties of gecko toe pads, based on atomic van der Waals attraction, have been understood for years now. The problem has been mass producing that kind of adhesion on synthetic materials. Georgia Tech researchers now feel that “surfaces that grip like gecko feet could be easily mass-produced.” An embedded video shows devices they engineered that can pick up anything when a knob is turned: fruit, golf balls, and even an egg. Turn the knob back, and the adhesion stops. A variety of applications come to mind:
Quote
Polymers with “gecko adhesion” surfaces could be used to make extremely versatile grippers to pick up very different objects even on the same assembly line. They could make picture hanging easy by adhering to both the picture and the wall at the same time. Vacuum cleaner robots with gecko adhesion could someday scoot up tall buildings to clean facades.
“With the exception of things like Teflon, it will adhere to anything. This is a clear advantage in manufacturing because we don’t have to prepare the gripper for specific surfaces we want to lift. Gecko-inspired adhesives can lift flat objects like boxes then turn around and lift curved objects like eggs and vegetables,” said Michael Varenberg, the study’s principal investigator and an assistant professor in Georgia Tech’s George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering.
No more nails in the wall; imagine putting a picture where you want it, then easily removing it and putting it somewhere else. It’s all conceivable if materials scientists can create the microscopic protrusions that make geckos able to climb glass, trees and almost anything. 
It’s All Free
These designs are free for the observant engineer, because nature had it first. Biomimetics would be no big deal if natural designs were simple, but biomimicry is thriving because engineers know when they have found something incredibly well designed. Animal and plant designs are often so good, and so detailed, in fact, that engineers struggle to imitate them. That’s good, because it pushes the envelope. Understanding the design principles behind natural materials requires close observation with electron microscopes and experimental manipulation, then a lot of thought about how to imitate them with synthetic materials. The future looks bright for biomimetic engineering — the science of applied intelligent design.

President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

 

Associate Links/Search