Evolution's topics - tribe.net

What this Tribe is about

2009-12-11T06:55:30Z

Recently, a couple people have commented that this tribe mentions "the controversies" in it's description, especially in reference to posts made by a certain person who kept bringing up creationist ideas.

Well, since I created this tribe, I suppose I can settle this once and for all. This tribe is about discussing the science of biological evolution. Yes, within each field of science there are controversies, things that still have not been figured out, etc. Scientific controversies. That is part of science.

Within the scientific community Creation vs. Evolution is NOT a controversy. It's an annoyance.

This tribe is not for debating Creation vs. Evolution. If a small bit of that comes up, fine. Let it be discussed intelligently, but that is not the point of this tribe.

Anyone who wants to come on here and TROLL through the threads and DISRUPT conversations by posting irrelevant creationist nonsense is not welcome. This has nothing to do with censorship. You wouldn't walk into a City Council meeting and start discussing what your favorite color is. It's not the appropriate time and place. (And if you can't see the comparison, clue, you shouldn't be here).

There are tribes (I'm sure) for debating creationism/ID vs. Evolution, etc. However, this is not one of them. Trolls are not welcome.

Thank you,

Your Humble Creator (sorry, couldn't resist)

posted in Evolution - 15 replies

Hunting and Gathering

2009-12-10T16:42:36Z

Makes sense.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/6720150/Shopping-styles-of-men-and-women-all-down-to-evolution-claim-scientists.html

posted in Evolution - 2 replies

New Mod: Krampus?

2009-12-10T07:50:55Z

I second your nomination.

Anybody else? Chime in.

posted in Evolution - 25 replies

Can we put an end to the whole birds evolved from dinosaurs crap?

2009-12-08T21:50:08Z

I mean come on, the fossil record does not show that T-Rex got smaller and smaller and eventually developed the habit of scratching for worms. What it does show is that birds existed nearly as long as dinosaurs and probably as long if not longer, since the small hollow bones are hard to perserve for that length of time. In fact it is far more likely that dinosaurs evolved from birds. We have even see more modern examples of this in new zealand for example, where birds of prey evolved into large,dinosaur like, flightless predators.

posted in Evolution - 8 replies

Teaching evolution can be harder then teaching religion.

2009-12-07T08:10:26Z

My daughter didn't bat an eye when I told her that god created everthing, but when I told her that our ancestors were apes, she looked at me like I was crazy. Later in another conversation I explained that my family came from Scottland, she said," The Monkeys? " She and my wife had a good laugh at my expense, now it is just my ancestors that she believes were other primates and that I am some kind of freak, oh well. Maybe when she is five we will have this conversation again.

posted in Evolution - 105 replies

HELP!

2009-12-02T14:11:50Z

Ok, I know this isn't the exact tribe for this topic so forgive me.

A dear friend of mine is swayed by the global warming denialists. He claims climate change is a religion and climatologists are its priests. He is totally swayed by Glenn Beck, Limbaugh, etc. I want to try to explain the science to him but he dropped out of high school in the 10th grade. I've sent him links, etc. I've explained the outright lies of his "cultist" leaders such as Roy Spencer.

What to do?!?!

posted in Evolution - 13 replies

Mapping the Body's Bacteria

2009-11-06T23:14:36Z

This is one of those important, necessary, and obvious studies that you wonder why wasn't done long ago, though obviously genetic sequencing plays an important factor in its timeliness:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8342991.stm

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

New Mod?

2009-10-29T17:49:43Z

It seems I missed a thread nominating a new mod. If the topic is not dead, I nominate Lenny and Blue-J.

I agree with others that this tribe needs to be about science. I don't want to get bogged down in the creation/ID vs. evolution bullshit either. This is a science tribe!!

posted in Evolution - 4 replies

This Bacteria's a Bitch

2009-08-27T21:03:31Z

Evolved to kill unborn males:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8222068.stm

Final sentence of the article reads: "If the Wolbachia frequency increased to a very high level, the host population could go extinct due to a shortage of males."

Question for the experts: Wouldn't the bacteria, at the point of encountering survival pressure, become less lethal? For example, I know that lethal viruses evolve over time to co-exist non-lethally with host species, since killing your host is not a great long-term survival strategy.

posted in Evolution - 2 replies

Not so "Top Drawer"

2009-08-20T15:26:54Z

Males Of High Genetic Quality Are Not Very Successful At Fertilizing Eggs
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090625141458.htm

ScienceDaily (Aug. 8, 2009) — Contrary to predictions, males of high genetic quality are not very successful when it comes to fertilizing eggs. A new study on seed beetles by Swedish and Danish scientists Göran Arnqvist and Trine Bilde shows that when a female mates with several males, the males of low genetic quality are the most successful in fertilizing eggs.

posted in Evolution - 24 replies

Software Recommendation

2009-08-10T16:09:24Z

Does anyone use bibliographic management software such as Endnote X2 with cite-as-you-write features? My department is considering purchasing Endnote or Bookends. I can't find very many independent reviews. Any recommendations, suggestions, etc.?

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

Speciation Independent Of Geographical Isolation

2009-07-26T16:29:43Z

Global Model For The Origin Of Species Independent Of Geographical Isolation
ScienceDaily (July 20, 2009)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090717150258.htm

From the article:
In a new study just published in Nature, Les Kaufman, Boston University professor of biology and associate director of the BU Marine Program along with a team of researchers from The New England Complex Systems Institute, have collaborated and found a way to settle the debate which deals with the origin of species independent of geographic isolation.
They demonstrated, using a computer model, how diverse species can arise from the arrangement of organisms across an area, without any influence from geographical barriers or even natural selection.

(So the last four words are false and is eventually corrected in the article.)

posted in Evolution - 4 replies

Are introductions all that bad……..

2009-07-26T10:22:30Z

In recent years xenophobia has extended to include the whole of life with many countries now employing strict controls on the importation of non native species, both plants and animals.

We are constantly bombarded with stories of killer aliens threatening our native fauna and flora. Similarly we are given the impression that this is a new phenomena, a consequence of our highly mobile society and the growth in international trade and that without us carrying these hitchhikers accidentally or deliberately then they would not migrate and the world would be a better place……..

Historical examples of this include the prickly pear and cane toad introductions to Australia, the American grey squirrel into the UK or the American root aphid into the vineyards of Europe… the list is quite endless and it always has a strong bias towards the malignant…

One recent example is this item from the BBC.. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/7254397.stm

And in the Garden Japanese knot weed, an invasive and all but impossible to kill bush has spread out to invade the countryside and wreak havoc on walls and foundations..

But what about the successes? What about the introductions we have benefited from? Like the little known introduction of trout to the Himalayas by the Colonial British. The immediate assumption is that this would have impacted greatly on the river life and it likely has but in many cases there is a surplus of food… in many lakes the trout are so well fed that not only do they grow to great size (8/9 lb) but they need to be ‘annoyed’ into striking if one wants to catch them. Similarly food is scarce in these regions particularly during the winter months and the trout provide a valuable addition to the local diet. It could be argued to that mosquito larvae are likely controlled to some extent where trout are present… Other colonial introductions include the house sparrow to Argentina, the story goes that the wife of a colonial Brit missed them and so a had a couple of pairs introduced… the house sparrow has become one of the great ornithological victims of modern Britain with numbers having declined in recent years by as much as 65% (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4686136.stm) .. its possible that if the trend continued that the Argentinean introduction could contribute to saving the native population… but there are actually far more notable introductions..

In the 15/1600’s carrots and onions came to Europe from Asia and later the introduction of the humble turnip revolutionized agriculture.. for the first time in our history we had the means to feed cattle over winter and so ended the St Michael mass slaughter.. this also heralded the switch from Ley to rotational farming.

Later we saw the introduction of potato, tomato and maize from the Americas and in the other direction went wheat, originally from the Middle East and rice from Asia… add to this apples, oranges, banana’s and grapes and we begin to see that without introductions we would still be eating coarse kales and parsnips…

Similarly do these invaders really need us? Many are very adapt at hitching rides with long distant migrants and some, like the monarch, painted lady and red admiral butterflies make highly impressive journeys…

Trade winds too must contribute.. in UK peat bogs pollen analysis of early post glacial ( 5-8000 BP) samples often reveals an abundance of pollen originating from the America’s and its therefore not beyond the possibilities that fungal diseases such as Phytophora infestans (potato blight), the cause of the potato famine got to Europe under its own steam..

Is migration not part of the evolutionary story? One that without which we would be the poorer ?

Similarly given the likely changes to environments as a consequence of climate change is not our ability to assist in migration, thus potentially saving diversity, not an asset….

I would aver that too much emphasis is put on the minority of bad introductions, particularly with respect to Island ecology, and that this is not a balanced view against the successful introductions upon which we all depend. This biased view similarly limits consideration of the potential that introductions into new environments could have in preserving bio-diversity or in mediating climate change.

Any thoughts?

Regards

Gm23

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

Toucan bills and Exuberant Polymorphism

2009-07-26T09:48:25Z

Two interesting research notes-

Study unravels mystery of toucan's huge bill
http://www.thestar.com/sciencetech/science/article/671028

Looking different improves ‘survival’ among animals of same species
http://www.topnews.in/looking-different-improves-survival-among-animals-same-species-2193056

There is not much emphasis given to the "all of the above" option on various evolutionary reasons explaining features such as the toucan's bill, but it seems more likely to me than any one factor by itself.

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

Reptile to Bird: a gliding pathway

2009-07-19T03:58:01Z

This is a nifty news note:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8150000/8150333.stm

Easier to see how scales modified into feathers with this example showing the advantage of gliding and falling like a feather versus like a rock. Splatting at the bottom of a fall does not perpetuate the species.

posted in Evolution - 2 replies

love under a full moon....

2009-07-16T02:44:30Z

thought this was an interesting item on the bbc site

http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8145000/8145125.stm

I wouldn't aver to say its revolutionary since many things sincronize their breeding to lunar cycles including us Himans (wll the XX half)... but umlike coral reefs or squid, where full moons co-incide with spring tides thus potentially providing better spawning opportunities than on neap tides (it could and has been argued) the benefit of full moon mating in amphibians is less obious... If the moon is being used purely as a clock to syncronze mating then surely a new or dark moon would be better given that a full moon must increase visability and detection by predators... one possibilty is amphibiands are just plain kinky and like to do it with the light on and in public... but then why not chose daylight? not my bag so I don'y know... but could anyone ele shed some (moon) light on why the full rather than the new should prove significant to amphibians?

regards

gm23

posted in Evolution - 8 replies

spider decoys

2009-07-08T18:00:50Z

http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8135000/8135844.stm

we just keep finding ways that other animals do things we thought were only done by us!

posted in Evolution - 3 replies

sociality in lions

2009-06-29T20:48:13Z

http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8120000/8120712.stm

Lions form prides to defend territory against other lions, not to improve their hunting success, a study reveals.

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

neoteny & the flat-faced ape

2009-06-25T02:30:13Z

this one is red hot:

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/03/20/0900544106.abstract

i guess it pays not to grow up!!

neoteny is fascinating to me. i can't say i have a complete grasp of it, why it works really. can anyone explain it?

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

when bat tribes go to war

2009-06-24T09:00:09Z

http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8091000/8091495.stm

this is vital research, as it's closer to the human behavior we're more familiar with than just about any other creatures, excepting chimps and ants.

posted in Evolution - 13 replies

plants that pretend to be sick

2009-06-19T18:37:16Z

http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8108000/8108940.stm

a predictable strategy, but here it is!

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

nice mammal tree computer art

2009-05-28T04:23:50Z

http://www.abc.net.au/beasts/familytree/

check it out, rodent people. keep your eye out for the whales. cool story

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

what will happen when it's discovered?

2009-04-24T02:42:19Z

life on another planet, that is. what will be the cultural effects?

what if it's bacteria on mars?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/16/science/space/16mars.html?ref=space

posted in Evolution - 18 replies

What do you make of this?

2009-04-19T01:05:55Z

http://s8int.com/dinolit35.html

posted in Evolution - 11 replies

Tooth formation

2009-04-06T23:05:40Z

http://www.cloningresources.com/research/Scientists_discover_why_teeth_form_in_a_single_row.asp

I've been fascinated for years by the possibility of therapeutic cloning in dentistry, so this article was a pleasant surprise.

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

The European Snails

2009-03-31T01:26:58Z

As I'm living in Warsaw at the moment, and these are quite common in the yard (once the snow melts), I think I'll participate. I wonder what sort of information they want. Well, off to their website.

Evolution study focuses on snail
By Sarah Mukherjee
Environment correspondent, BBC News
Members of the public across Europe are being asked to look in their gardens or local green spaces for banded snails as part of a UK-led evolutionary study.

The Open University says its Evolution MegaLab will be one of the largest evolutionary studies ever undertaken.

Scientists believe the research could show how the creatures have evolved in the past 40 years to reflect changes in temperature and their predators.

The six-month study, starting in April, will ask people to submit data online.

'Ideal organism'

Professor Jonathan Silvertown, from the OU, said: "I was thinking about Darwin year and how we could help people get an idea of what Darwin was talking about.

"The banded snail has been studied for 60 or more years, so it's an ideal organism to use. It's something that's very common, we know what the genetics are and it's safe to handle."

Professor Silvertown said there were two main evolutionary drivers that affect where yellow and brown banded snails are found.

The first is climate - darker-shelled snails tend to be further north, and scientists believe this is because dark shells get warmer quicker than lighter ones.

Darker-shelled snails could also be active for longer - which would make a difference to how much they could eat and how many offspring they could have.

The second evolutionary driver is predation by thrushes.

The birds hunt by sight and they find it more difficult to find yellow-striped shells around grass and brown shells against brown leaves - so yellow-shelled snails have been more common in grassland and darker ones in areas with brownish background environments.

'Genuine study'

"We think [the snails] have changed in the last 40 or 50 years," said Professor Silvertown.

"Firstly, the climate has warmed up, so we think the distribution of colours has probably changed.

"Secondly, thrushes have become far less common in the last 30 years or so - so snail colouring in different habitats might be less important."

This is what the Evolution MegaLab, which will run from April to October, will be trying to discover.

"There's a lot of historical data on the website," said Professor Silvertown.

"We have data from the past on 8,000 or so snail populations, so if you submit your data on the website, it will automatically make a comparison telling you whether there's been any change in your area."

Professor Silvertown said this was a genuine scientific study and not just a public relations exercise.

It has been funded in part by the Royal Society and the British Council, and he and his team are hoping that a major report will be published on the data collected at the beginning of next year.

He also points out that this could be an invaluable tool for researchers of the future who will be able to look at this project and compare any further evolutionary changes.

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

Books for the non-biologists among us.

2009-03-30T09:14:25Z

I saw this on the Times site this morning. Think I'll go to Amazon next.

I had plenty of biology, chemistry, physics, etc. in school. I've also taken much social science coursework, and been intimately involved in the cultural relativism debate. My ex is a PhD in cultural anthropology, and I copy edited every piece she wrote, from undergraduate work, through her dissertation. I'm not in the business, so to speak, but my work leans heavily upon this divide.

Perhaps, you all, could suggest some others as well?

From The Times
March 28, 2009
Nature v nurture? Please don't ask
The question has fuelled some of history's fiercest scientific and political feuds. Now we have an answer
Mark Henderson

The monster Caliban, according to his master, Prospero, was “a devil, a pure devil, on whose nature nurture can never stick”. Yet only a few decades before Shakespeare wrote The Tempest, St Ignatius Loyola had founded the Jesuit order, with its famous maxim: “Give me the child until he is 7, and I will show you the man.”

This ancient debate over the relative contributions of inheritance and experience to the human condition has never been more charged than in the genetic age. On one side stood those who sought and saw genetic explanations for human psychology; on the other, those who believed it to be moulded by culture. There was little common ground. Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, an evolutionary psychologist, has even joked that perhaps we are genetically programmed to set nature against nurture.

Since the middle of the last century the nurture camp has been dominant. Just as molecular biology began to unravel the secrets of DNA, genetics and evolution were relegated to psychological bit-players by a new orthodoxy, which held that biology has forged a human mind of almost limitless malleability. It was the doctrine of the blank slate.

The idea, usually traced to the 17th-century philosopher John Locke, grew popular in the Enlightenment, fitting the mood of challenge to the supposedly innate authority of monarchy and aristocracy. It was a statement of individual freedom, which became strongly associated with the political Left. Though many early socialists were enthusiasts for eugenics, later generations grew suspicious of genetics, particularly after it was abused to justify oppression of disadvantaged racial and social groups, most brutally in Nazi Germany. Liberal opinion turned against the concept of a biological human nature, which was increasingly seen as a tool with which male and bourgeois elites could rationalise hegemony.

The movement was driven by the social sciences. From psychology came Sigmund Freud's notion that attitudes and mental health are explained by childhood experience. The behaviourism of B.F.Skinner added the claim that human beings could be conditioned by training, much as Ivan Pavlov's celebrated dogs salivated at the sound of a bell.

From anthropology came the research of Franz Boas and Margaret Mead, whose comparative studies of different societies suggested that traditions could steer human behaviour in a multitude of directions. Mead's purported discovery of free love among Samoan women was influential because - though founded on poor data - it challenged prevailing sexual mores. Karl Marx's political and economic theories saw human nature as something to be reshaped and directed to facilitate revolution. And postmodernism contributed the mantra that even knowledge and truth are socially constructed and relative.

What emerged was a new model of behaviour, in which human nature is anything but fixed or shared, but can be moulded into many configurations by culture. If genetic influences are allowed at all, they are wholly secondary to those of the environment. To its supporters, this became axiomatic to a fair society: if anything can be learnt, and anybody can do the learning, then people can be taught to value equality. Social justice and morality became intertwined with the concept that little in life is laid down, or even much affected, by inherited genes.

Though well-intentioned, and in some respects an important antidote to pseudoscientific genetic determinism, this view was dangerously inflexible. Any evidence that genetics might be seriously influential after all would threaten the very foundations of liberty and equality - so it would have to be resisted, as would research that might provide it.

The result was that scientists who investigated effects on human behaviour found their positions caricatured and their politics demonised as reactionary, even fascist. E.O.Wilson, the great evolutionary theorist and conservationist, is no man of the Right. Yet when he dared in the 1970s to suggest that human nature, like that of other animals, has a biological basis that might fruitfully be studied, his lectures were picketed and students doused him with water. The left-wing biologists Steven Rose, Leon Kamin and Richard Lewontin responded with a book entitled Not in Our Genes, which accused Wilson, Richard Dawkins and other sociobiologists of a crude determinism designed to legitimise the status quo. “Its adherents claim, first, that the details of present and past social arrangements are the inevitable manifestations of the specific action of genes,” they wrote.

Such attacks were misconceived. First, as Steven Pinker has pointed out, they set up a straw man. It is simply impossible to find serious biologists who believe that behaviour and social structure are “the inevitable manifestations of the specific action of genes”. Those who reject cultural determinism make a much more modest proposal - that genes, as well as the environment, make a contribution. As Dawkins wrote in a review of Not in Our Genes: “Reductionism, in the ‘sum of the parts' sense, is obviously daft, and is nowhere to be found in the writings of real biologists.”

What is more, cultural determinism can be just as inimical to freedom as its genetic counterpart. It implies that instead of being prisoners of our genes, we are prisoners of our parents, teachers and societies. Those who grow up in poverty will be forever disadvantaged, while those who come from privilege will retain it. Autism can be blamed on “refrigerator mothers”, and adults' relationship problems on their overprotective families. As a world view it is quite as bleak as one based on inheritance.

It has also become scientifically unsustainable. As research reveals more about inheritance, it has become abundantly clear that humans are not blank slates. Neither, however, are our personalities and behaviour forged by genes alone. The great controversy, indeed, is giving way to consensus, as improved understanding of how genes actually work shows the difficulty of separating nature and nurture.

Much of the critical evidence has emerged through the study of twins. Identical twins share all their DNA, while fraternal twins share only half - they are no more closely related on a genetic level than are ordinary siblings. Both kinds of twins, however, share a womb, a family and a cultural environment. Comparisons between the two types can thus tease out the extent to which inheritance is important.

Across a wide range of traits, including IQ, personality indicators such as extroversion and neuroticism, and even homosexuality, religiosity and political conservatism, identical twins are more similar to one another than are fraternal pairs. This indicates that genes must affect these aspects of personality.

The concordance between identical twins, however, is rarely 100per cent - their IQ scores, for example, tend to be around 70 per cent similar, compared with around 50per cent for non-identical pairs. By definition, inheritance therefore cannot be the only factor involved: if it were, identical twins would always turn out the same. For most human qualities, neither the extreme-nurture nor the extreme-nature hypothesis can be correct.

Even more striking evidence has come from a recent series of studies led by Avshalom Caspi and Terrie Moffitt. These scientists have been following up a cohort of children born in 1972-73 in Dunedin, New Zealand, recording details of their life experiences and testing their DNA. The results have demolished the nature- nurture dichotomy.

First, Moffitt and Caspi studied a gene called MAOA, which has two variants or alleles. Boys with one allele are more likely to behave antisocially and get into trouble with the law - but only if they were also maltreated as children. When raised in well-adjusted families, those with the “risky” allele are fine. It is not a gene “for” criminality, and no determinism - genetic or environmental - is involved. A genetic variant must be activated by an environmental influence to do any potential harm.

The serotonin transporter gene, 5HTT, also has two alleles, and is known to be involved in mood. Moffitt and Caspi found that people with one allele were 2.5 times more likely to develop clinical depression than those with the other - but, again, only under particular circumstances. The risk applies only to people who also experience stressful life events such as unemployment, divorce or bereavement. When their environments are happy, their genotypes made no difference.

These results show the sterility of the old nature-nurture debate. Nature works through nurture, and nurture through nature, to shape our personalities, aptitudes, health and behaviour. The question should not be which is the dominant influence, but how they fit together.

From 50 Genetics Ideas You Really Need to Know by Mark Henderson to be published by Quercus at £9.99 on April 2. To buy it for £9.49 inc p&p call 0845 2712134 or visit timesonline.co.uk/booksfirst

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

Evolution of the NEO-Human

2009-03-21T03:40:56Z

what do we think of this??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TC1X9yPLWwg

posted in Evolution - 32 replies

darwin's autobiography

2009-03-16T21:15:09Z

i picked a good year to read it, and i have to say, i really like the guy. i've been pleasantly surprised by his approachability and humility. has anyone else read it? also, for being such a reported racist (a claim i'm not yet in position to analyze), he sure does go out of his way to deride slavery a lot. i expected more atrocious anachronistic attitudes than i encountered.

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

New kind of humans.... would we know

2009-03-16T20:21:33Z

So evolution wise there must be a new kind of human either around already or being born son.
( I'm obvisouly not a scientist) But remember back, when there were two kinds of humans , homosapiens and whatever was before us, well did the whatever was before us recognize the homosapiens as a different kind of human. Would we recognixe the new kind that might be alive now? Could I be a new kind of human without knowing it? Would the new kind of human's biology be indistigusihable from ours? Or would it be obvious? Is there any way to know this stuff? Could these people be trapped in some lab somewhere being studied?

posted in Evolution - 26 replies

Is There Anything Good About Men?

2009-03-10T08:56:55Z

A very intriguing paper on the evolution of gender differences posted by Josh in Atheists; would love to hear some thoughts from the tribe on this:

http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm

posted in Evolution - 7 replies

strange evidence of lamarckian inheritance in mice

2009-02-23T14:38:13Z

The effects of an animal's environment during adolescence can be passed down to future offspring, according to two new studies. If applicable to humans, the research, done on rodents, suggests that the impact of both childhood education and early abuse could span generations. The findings provide support for a 200-year-old theory of evolution that has been largely dismissed: Lamarckian evolution, which states that acquired characteristics can be passed on to offspring.

"The results are extremely surprising and unexpected," says Li-Huei Tsai, a neuroscientist at MIT who was not involved in the research. Indeed, one of the studies found that a boost in the brain's ability to rewire itself and a corresponding improvement in memory could be passed on. "This study is probably the first study to show there are transgenerational effects not only on behavior but on brain plasticity."

more:

http://www.technologyreview.com/biomedicine/22061/

posted in Evolution - 6 replies

chicken, dinosaurs and T-rex feathers

2009-01-31T03:44:46Z

so, did t-rex have feathers or not? anyone know? a big story:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/04/070412-dino-tissues.html

you can see it in their feet.

posted in Evolution - 14 replies

whats up with the "lucifer project"

2009-01-27T18:46:27Z

can this be true? can they really turn jupiter into another sun and start terraforming titian???

http://www.mytv.it/player-cs-em.swf?key=C2D9CBB905B1DFE2"

posted in Evolution - 23 replies

Why Darwin was wrong about the tree of life

2009-01-25T06:34:55Z

This is a very interesting article from "New Scientist" magazine:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126921.600-why-darwin-was-wrong-about-the-tree-of-life.html?full=true

It discusses the fact that mutation and natural selection are not the only processes driving evolutionary change. Horizontal gene transfer (HGT) is quite important for one-celled organisms which has been well known for a while now. The article discusses new evidence this also "has been a major driving force in animal evolution." They say, "The most likely agents of this genetic shuffling are viruses, which constantly cut and paste DNA from one genome into another, often across great taxonomic distances. In fact, by some reckonings, 40 to 50 per cent of the human genome consists of DNA imported horizontally by viruses, some of which has taken on vital biological functions (New Scientist, 27 August 2008, p 38)." It also discusses endosymbiosis and hybridisation.

posted in Evolution - 3 replies

Resurrection

2009-01-22T04:01:00Z

Here is an interesting article on "resurrecting" extinct species:
Ten extinct beasts that could walk the Earth again
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126905.000-ten-extinct-beasts-that-could-walk-the-earth-again.html?full=true

posted in Evolution - 16 replies

Monkey Gene That Blocks AIDS Viruses Evolved More Than Once

2009-01-19T03:47:16Z

Monkey Gene That Blocks AIDS Viruses Evolved More Than Once
http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20080229/hl_hsn/monkeygenethatblocksaidsvirusesevolvedmorethanonce

FRIDAY, Feb. 29 (HealthDay News) -- A gene in Asian monkeys that may have evolved as protection against a group of viruses that includes HIV has been identified by Harvard Medical School researchers, who add that their finding suggests the current AIDS epidemic is not a new kind of scourge.

The TRIM5-CypA gene found in Asian macaques is a hybrid of two existing proteins, TRIM5 and CypA. This combination creates a single protein that blocks infections by lentiviruses.

This is the second time a TRIM5-CypA hybrid gene has been identified in monkeys. The other one -- TRIMCyp -- was found in South American owl monkeys in 2004. But it's not likely that these two gene combinations arose from a single common ancestor, the Harvard researchers said.

TRIM5-CypA wasn't found in monkey closely related to the Asian macaques and TRIMCyp wasn't found in any other South American primate species. This suggests that the two combination genes evolved separately, once in the macaques and once in the owl monkeys.

This development of similar genetic adaptations in different species is called convergent evolution. A prime example is the development of flight in bats and in birds.

The fact that adaptations involving TRIM5 and CypA occurred at least twice in primates suggests that this combination provided a strong evolutionary advantage, the Harvard researchers said.

It may be possible that the combination genes developed to prevent infection by prehistoric viruses related to modern HIV, they suggested. If this is true, it could mean that an AIDS-like epidemic is not unique to the current time, and such outbreaks may have afflicted the primate ancestors of humans.

The study is published in the Feb. 29 issue of PLoS Pathogens.

posted in Evolution - 7 replies

Finds test human origins theory

2009-01-17T06:07:08Z

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6937476.stm

Two hominid fossils discovered in Kenya are challenging a long-held view of human evolution.

The broken upper jaw-bone and intact skull from humanlike creatures, or hominids, are described in Nature. Previously, the hominid Homo habilis was thought to have evolved into the more advanced Homo erectus, which evolved into us.

Now, habilis and erectus are thought to be sister species that overlapped in time.

posted in Evolution - 4 replies

Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial

2009-01-17T05:52:11Z

November 13 NOVA is airing a two-hour special on the Kitzmiller v. Dover case. They have also dedicated a fairly substantial amount of web space to the topic:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/apsell.html

posted in Evolution - 7 replies

New Geologic Epoch

2009-01-17T05:43:40Z

Ok so this is not exactly about evolution but it is related.

Humans Force Earth into New Geologic Epoch
by Robert Roy Britt
LiveScience Managing Editor
LiveScience.com Sun Jan 27, 1:46 PM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20080127/sc_livescience/humansforceearthintonewgeologicepoch

Humans have altered Earth so much that scientists say a new epoch in the planet's geologic history has begun.

Say goodbye to the 10,000-year-old Holocene Epoch and hello to the Anthropocene.

Among the major changes heralding this two-century-old man-made epoch:

* Vastly altered sediment erosion and deposition patterns.
* Major disturbances to the carbon cycle and global temperature.
* Wholesale changes in biology, from altered flowering times to new migration patterns.
* Acidification of the ocean, which threatens tiny marine life that forms the bottom of the food chain.

posted in Evolution - 3 replies

I Am Evolution

2009-01-17T05:39:52Z

I Am Evolution
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90311455
by Holly Dunsworth

I believe evolution. It's easy. It's my life. I'm a paleoanthropologist. I study fossils of humans, apes and monkeys, and I teach college students about their place in nature.

Of course I believe evolution.

But that is different from believing in evolution.

To believe in something takes faith, trust, effort, strength. I need none of these things to believe evolution. It just is. My health is better because of medical research based on evolution. My genetic code is practically the same as a chimpanzee's. My bipedal feet walk on an earth full of fossil missing links. And when my feet tire, those fossils fuel my car.

To believe in something also implies hope. Hope of happiness, reward, forgiveness, eternal life. There is no hope wrapped up in my belief. Unless you count the hope that one day I'll discover the most beautifully complete fossil human skeleton ever found, with a label attached saying exactly what species it belonged to, what food it ate, how much it hunted, if it could speak, if it could laugh, if it could love and if it could throw a curveball. But this fantasy is not why I believe evolution — as if evolution is something I hope comes true.

After all the backyard bone collecting I did as a child, I managed to carve out a career where I get to ask the ultimate question on a daily basis: "Where did I come from and how?"

If our beliefs are important enough, we live our lives in service to them. That's how I feel about evolution. My role as a female Homo sapiens is to return each summer to Kenya, dig up fossils, and piece together our evolutionary history. Scanning the ground for weeks, hoping to find a single molar, or gouging out the side of a hill, one bucket of dirt at a time, I'm always in search of answers to questions shared by the whole human species. The experience deepens my understanding not just about what drives my life, but all our lives, where we came from. And the deeper I go, the more I understand that everything is connected. A bullfrog to a gorilla, a hummingbird to me, to you.

My belief is not immutable. It is constantly evolving with accumulating evidence, new knowledge and breakthrough discoveries. For example, within my lifetime, our history has expanded from being rooted 3 million years ago with the famous Lucy skeleton, to actually beginning over 6 million years ago with a cranium from Chad. The metamorphic nature of my belief is not at all like a traditional religious one; it's more like seeing is believing.

So I believe evolution.

I feel it. I breathe it. I listen to evolution, I observe it and I do evolution. I write, study, analyze, scrutinize and collect evolution. I am evolution.

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

Vatican says aliens could exist!

2009-01-17T05:30:40Z

The more the church tries to play intellectual catch-up, the more irrelevant it seems. Some of these pronouncements sound exactly like stand-up comedy (cross-posted on Atheists tribe):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7399661.stm

Vatican says aliens could exist
By David Willey
BBC News, Rome

The Pope's chief astronomer says that life on Mars cannot be ruled out.

Writing in the Vatican newspaper, the astronomer, Father Gabriel Funes, said intelligent beings created by God could exist in outer space.

Father Funes, director of the Vatican Observatory near Rome, is a respected scientist who collaborates with universities around the world.

The search for forms of extraterrestrial life, he says, does not contradict belief in God.

The official Vatican newspaper headlines his article 'Aliens Are My Brother'.

Just as there are multiple forms of life on earth, so there could exist intelligent beings in outer space created by God. And some aliens could even be free from original sin, he speculates.

Asked about the Catholic Church's condemnation four centuries ago of the Italian inventor of the telescope, Galileo, Father Funes diplomatically says mistakes were made, but it is time to turn the page and look towards the future.

Science and religion need each other, and many astronomers believe in God, he assures readers.

To strengthen its scientific credentials, the Vatican is organising a conference next year to mark the 200th anniversary of the birth of the author of the Origin of Species, Charles Darwin.

posted in Evolution - 6 replies

Human evolution has accelerated

2009-01-17T05:25:57Z

A study says human evolution has accelerated and is increasing human differences. Key evidence: Comparative mutations in genomes around the world, plus estimations as to when each mutation arose. Researchers' conclusions: 1) "Humans are changing relatively rapidly on a scale of centuries to millennia … We aren't the same as people even 1,000 or 2,000 years ago." 2) "Races are evolving away from each other. … Genes are evolving fast in Europe, Asia and Africa, but almost all of these are unique to their continent of origin." Examples: malaria resistance in Africa, lactose tolerance in Europe, ear-wax dryness in Asia. Proposed reasons: 1) More people, so more mutations. 2) Higher population density, so more fatal epidemics. 3) Migration, so new habitats, so new selective pressures. 4) Agriculture, so dietary changes, so new diseases. 5) Little "flow of genes between the regions." Old idea: "Once people developed culture, they protected themselves from the environment and from the forces of natural selection." New idea: Selection actually increased, because "people also had to adapt to the environments that their culture created." Side comment: "Among the fastest-evolving genes are those related to brain development." Critiques: 1) Brought to you by the same guys who think Jews evolved high intelligence in this millennium … 2) and who now think "milk drinking gave lactose-tolerant Indo-European speakers more energy, allowing them to conquer a large area." 3) Research on genetic differences will lead to racism. 4) We don't know why most new genes were advantageous. 5) We're still 99 percent alike.

See Slate for links to primary and other sources:
http://www.slate.com/id/2179578/

posted in Evolution - 27 replies

are some men more likely to father boys?

2009-01-08T08:40:53Z

intriguing! this was quite an ambitious and thorough study.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/health/06real.html?_r=1&ref=science

"Trends in Population Sex Ratios May be Explained by Changes in the Frequencies of Polymorphic Alleles of a Sex Ratio Gene"

Abstract A test for heritability of the sex ratio in human genealogical data is reported here, with the finding that there is significant heritability of the parental sex ratio by male, but not female offspring. A population genetic model was used to examine the hypothesis that this is the result of an autosomal gene with polymorphic alleles, which affects the sex ratio of offspring through the male reproductive system. The model simulations show that an equilibrium sex ratio may be maintained by frequency dependent selection acting on the heritable variation provided by the gene. It is also shown that increased mortality of pre-reproductive males causes an increase in male births in following generations, which explains why increases in the sex ratio have been seen after wars, also why higher infant and juvenile mortality of males may be the cause of the male-bias typically seen in the human primary sex ratio. It is concluded that various trends seen in population sex ratios are the result of changes in the relative frequencies of the polymorphic alleles of the proposed gene. It is argued that this occurs by common inheritance and that parental resource expenditure per sex of offspring is not a factor in the heritability of sex ratio variation.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/d87k212rx7l7211g/

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

burning man theme 2009 : EVOLUTION!!

2008-11-08T03:56:47Z

http://www.burningman.com/art_of_burningman/bm09_theme.html

posted in Evolution - 3 replies

Technological Evolution

2008-11-08T00:30:47Z

This chart was originally developed for use on the Babylon 5 TV series, but it's pretty sensible.

The Ages of Advancement

Pre-Sentient Age [ex: the Kinderrach on Omelinn III]
Very little social organization. Simple "twig technology" in use.

Primitive Age
Tribal organization. Food gained through hunting and gathering and/or primitive agriculture. Simple tools in use. Transportation is primarily by foot. Verbal and pictorial communication.

Archaic Age [ex: Froon]
Regional social organization. Food gained through planting crops and breeding livestock. Small scale manufactured goods. Transportation through animal, water, and/or wind-powered means. Written communication.

Industrial Age [ex: Cauralline]
Continental social organization. Population is divided evenly between agricultural and manufacturing industries. Tools become more advanced. Electricity is in use. Simple mechanized vehicles. Mass produced text and some electronic communication.

Atomic Age [ex: Pre'lek]
Mass production becomes more efficient, giving rise to advances in alloys and plastics. Primitive space travel.

Information Age [ex: Onteen]
Global social organization. Automation increases effeciency in manufacturing. Atomic and solar power are in use. In-system space travel is developed. Information based industries arise.

Stellar Age [ex: Humans]
The galactic average. Colonial social organization. Highly efficient industries. Large-scale contruction techniques discovered. Jumpgate technology allows extra-system travel. Tachyon-based communication allows "instant" communication over interstellar distances.

Galactic Age [ex: Centauri]
Some principles of magneto-gravitics are developed. Advanced biochemistry.

Gravitic Age [ex: Minbari]
Magneto-gravitic principles are fully understood. Crystalline-based (rather than metallurgic) technology developed. Slicer-beam weaponry discovered.

Organic Age [ex: Ikarrans]
Ability to create fully functioning organic technology: from scanners to starships. Planetary-scale device construction possible. Research into "souls" yields results.

Ultratech [ex: Shadows]
Creation of powerful, multi-function crystalline artifacts. Manipulation of "souls" possible. Entry/exit to hyperspace accomplished through advanced means: dimensional phasing/hyperflux.

Ascendant [ex: the Worm, Jason Ironheart]
Almost god-like in intelligence and power. All, in part or in whole, are extradimensional in nature. Not only do they walk among the stars like giants, almost no barrier bars their passage.

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

orangutans use drugs

2008-11-08T00:20:43Z

"Indonesian wild orangutans have demonstrated a certain degree of medicinal savvy by deploying naturally-occuring anti-inflammatory drugs to 'treat aches and pains'..."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/28/orangutan_balm/

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

Dover Transcripts and "evita"

2008-09-01T20:02:57Z

Hey all. I'm reading the Dover transcripts and one of teh Expert Witneses talks of a Dr. Robert Pennock, who is discussing a program called Evita.

I tried to look it up in wiki, and only found ms. pop-evoultion-incarnate, Madonna and the movie.

can anyone tell me a bit more about this computer program (he is quite strong in his language that it is NOT a simulation of evolution, but is in reality, "evolution")?

posted in Evolution - 3 replies

sexy disease

2008-08-30T05:51:30Z

i think dawkins posed the question of whether or not a disease resulting in someone appearing sexier might spread rather successfully. is there an example of this?

posted in Evolution - 7 replies

The influence of viruses on evolution

2008-08-28T19:17:24Z

An interesting article in SciAm though now somewhat old. Whether alive or not it is about time we recognize the vitally important impact the presence of viruses have had on the general mechanisms of evolution.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=are-viruses-alive-2004&sc=rss

August 8, 2008 in Biology

Are Viruses Alive?

Although viruses challenge our concept of what "living" means, they are vital members of the web of life
By Luis P. Villarreal
Editor's Note: This story was originally published in the December 2004 issue of Scientific American.

In an episode of the classic 1950s television comedy The Honeymooners, Brooklyn bus driver Ralph Kramden loudly explains to his wife, Alice, “You know that I know how easy you get the virus.” Half a century ago even regular folks like the Kramdens had some knowledge of viruses—as microscopic bringers of disease. Yet it is almost certain that they did not know exactly what a virus was. They were, and are, not alone.

For about 100 years, the scientific community has repeatedly changed its collective mind over what viruses are. First seen as poisons, then as life-forms, then biological chemicals, viruses today are thought of as being in a gray area between living and nonliving: they cannot replicate on their own but can do so in truly living cells and can also affect the behavior of their hosts profoundly. The categorization of viruses as nonliving during much of the modern era of biological science has had an unintended consequence: it has led most researchers to ignore viruses in the study of evolution. Finally, however, scientists are beginning to appreciate viruses as fundamental players in the history of life. (excerpt)

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

parasite mind control

2008-08-12T07:18:12Z

just moving along from the T. gondii conversation in "sexy disease":

"Still not sure that parasites can manipulate the behavior of host organisms? Consider these other cases:

The lancet fluke Dicrocoelium dendriticum forces its ant host to attach to the tips of grass blades, the easier to be eaten. The fluke needs to get into the gut of a grazing animal to complete its life cycle.

The fluke Euhaplorchis californiensis causes fish to shimmy and jump so wading birds will grab them and eat them, for the same reason.

Hairworms, which live inside grasshoppers, sabotage the grasshopper's central nervous system, forcing them to jump into pools of water, drowning themselves. Hairworms then swim away from their hapless hosts to continue their life cycle."

http://www.livescience.com/technology/060210_technovelgy.html

posted in Evolution - 3 replies

encyclopedia of life

2008-08-12T04:37:49Z

e.o. wilson's TED prize wish is real!

http://www.eol.org/

"What is EOL?

Welcome to the first release of the Encyclopedia of Life portal. This is the very beginning of our exciting journey to document all species of life on Earth.

Comprehensive, collaborative, ever-growing, and personalized, the Encyclopedia of Life is an ecosystem of websites that makes all key information about all life on Earth accessible to anyone, anywhere in the world. Our goals are to:

Create a constantly evolving encyclopedia that lives on the Internet, with contributions from scientists and amateurs alike.

Transform the science of biology, and inspire a new generation of scientists, by aggregating virtually all known data about every living species.

Engage a wide audience of schoolchildren, educators, citizen scientists, academics and those who are just curious about Earth's species.
Increase our collective understanding of life on Earth, and safeguard the richest possible spectrum of biodiversity."

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

rare gorilla enclave

2008-08-07T09:12:18Z

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa/08/05/congo.gorillas/index.html

good news, for a change!

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

expelled: no intelligence allowed indeed

2008-08-07T00:53:38Z

http://www.expelledthemovie.com/home.php

#10 in the US.

box office: more than $3 million already.

evolutionists need to reach out and converse with people about this, perhaps be present outside of theaters to engage in discussion. stein is even linking evolution with nazism in the film, as I understand it. i haven't seen it yet, though i want to give every voice its fair listen. i just feel bad about giving the guy money.

for example, just what problem is supposing an intelligent designer supposed to solve? seems to me it adds whole entire set of even harder questions to answer, like where did god come from? what is god like? why would god do all of this? a lot harder to answer than the transition from inorganic to organic matter, a transition for which we have a few excellent hypotheses.

posted in Evolution - 37 replies

theory of frozen plasticity

2008-08-05T06:02:59Z

http://www.natur.cuni.cz/~flegr/pdf/psychiatry.pdf
http://www.natur.cuni.cz/~flegr/pdf/origin.pdf

at first glance some of this seems like bad translation or too much becherovka, but he may be on to something...?

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

cilia go indie?

2008-08-02T23:46:29Z

LYNN MARGULIS
Biologist, University of Massachusetts, Amherst; Author, Symbiosis in Cell Evolution.

I feel that I know something that will turn out to be correct and eventually proved to be true beyond doubt...

What?

That our ability to perceive signals in the environment evolved directly from our bacterial ancestors. That is, we, like all other mammals including our apish brothers detect odors, distinguish tastes, hear bird song and drum beats and we too feel the vibrations of the drums. With our eyes closed we detect the light of the rising sun. These abilities to sense our surroundings are a heritage that preceded the evolution of all primates, all vertebrate animals, indeed all animals. Such sensitivities to wafting plant scents, tasty salted mixtures, police cruiser sirens, loving touches and star light register because of our "sensory cells".

These avant guard cells of the nasal passages, the taste buds, the inner ear, the touch receptors in the skin and the retinal rods and cones all have in common the presence at their tips of projections ("cell processes") called cilia. Cilia have a recognizable fine structure. With a very high power ("electron") microscope a precise array of protein tubules, nine, exactly nine pairs of tubules are arranged in a circular array and two singlet tubules are in the center of this array. All sensory cells have this common feature whether in the light-sensitive retina of the eye or the balance-sensitive semicircular canals of the inner ear. Cross-section slices of the tails of human, mouse and even insect (fruit-fly) sperm all share this same instantly recognizable structure too. Why this peculiar pattern? No one knows for sure but it provides the evolutionist with a strong argument for common ancestry. The size (diameter) of the circle (0.25 micrometers) and of the constituent tubules (0.024 micrometers) aligned in the circle is identical in the touch receptors of the human finger and the taste buds of the elephant.

What do I feel that I know, what Oscar Wilde said (that "even true things can be proved")?

Not only that the sensory cilia derive from these exact 9-fold symmetrical structures in protists such as the "waving feet" of the paramecium or the tail of the vaginal-itch protist called Trichomonas vaginalis. Indeed, all biologists agree with the claim that sperm tails and all these forms of sensory cilia share a common ancestry.

But I go much farther. I think the the common ancestor of the cilium, but not the rest of the cell, was a free-swimming entity, a skinny snake-like bacterium that, 1500 million years ago squiggled through muds in a frantic search for food. Attracted by some smells and repelled by others the bacteria, by themselves, already enjoyed a repertoire of sensory abilities that remain with their descendants to this day. In fact, this bacterial ancestor of the cilium never went extinct, rather some of its descendants are uncomfortably close to us today. This hypothetical bacterium, ancestor to all the cilia, was no ordinary rod-shaped little dot.

No, this bacterium who still has many live relatives, entered into symbiotic partnerships with other very different kinds of bacteria. Together this two component partnership swam and stuck together both persisted. What kind of bacterium became an attached symbiont that impelled its partner forward? None other than a squirming spirochete bacterium.

The spirochete group of bacteria includes many harmless mud-dwellers but it also contains a few scary freaks: the treponeme of syphilis and the borrelias of Lyme disease. We animals got our exquisite ability to sense our surroundings—to tell light from dark, noise from silence, motion from stillness and fresh water from brackish brine—from a kind of bacterium whose relatives we despise. Cilia were once free-agents but they became an integral part of all animal cells. Even though the concept that cilia evolved from spirochetes has not been proved I think it is true. Not only is it true but, given the powerful new techniques of molecular biology I think the hypothesis will be conclusively proved. In the not-too-distant future people will wonder why so many scientists were so against my idea for so long!

http://www.edge.org/q2005/q05_7.html

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

Applied Evolution -- Epidemiology

2008-08-01T20:54:42Z

Race based medicine is the study of genetic epidemiology where a certain ethnic group(s) may possess a higher predisposition for disease(s) due to evolutionary pressures unique to that group(s). Race-based medicine really took off after the FDA approval of Bidil--drug proven to be an effective treatment for African Americans with heart failure, cardiovascular disease, and/or diabetes. Bidil is approved for use in African Americans ONLY.

One of the country's leading research centers for race-based medicine is Howard University's National Human Genome Center. The following paragraph is from their website:
http://www.genomecenter.howard.edu/units/Genetic_Epidemiology/default.htm
"An obvious benefit of the human Genome project is bound to be a better understanding of human evolutionary history. By employing recent molecular tools we can now study polymorphic markers (SNPs and STRs) on different chromosomes to understand the degree of similarity or divergence between African populations; a process that will have profound implication for blacks in the Western Hemisphere whose ancestors are the survivals of the forced migration out of the west and southwest coast of Africa. Different groups have attempted to study these issues with varying success partly due to poorly developed hypotheses and the inherent biases ever present in the quest to understanding the origin of human civilization. Proposed population-based resources will undoubtedly facilitate the full participation of investigators at the genome center at Howard University. A major goal of this genome center is to lead the discussion on genetic variation in populations of the African Diaspora."

Georgia M. Dunston, one of the Centers researchers and founders, is critical of race-based medicine. She argues that race-based medicine will further fuel negative and illegitimate racial stereotyping. Relevant for disease predisposition is recent admixture that would effect genetic predispositions. Relevant for disease onset is a change in diet resulting from a change in environment effecting probabilities of disease onset. For example, a person with a genetic predisposition to obesity, high blood pressure, or diabetes is more likely to suffer from the disease when the diet radically changes to one of high fat and sugar consumed over long periods. Forced migration (via slave trading) was the vehicle that potentiated recent admixture. (I am aware that African slaves were sometimes forced to breed with whites resulting in forced admixture.) The evolutionary processes that cause current epidemiological predispositions extend far beyond the recent history of forced migration and include earlier non-forced migration and degrees of admixture. Note we are talking about groups of people and not individuals.

The Center does conduct research in Africa related to genetic predispositions for disease. I do not know the extent to which they are comparing African Americans to Africans.

posted in Evolution - 6 replies

baculum

2008-07-30T07:29:21Z

"The zoologist Richard Dawkins speculated in 2006, that the loss of the bone in humans, when it is present in our nearest related species the chimpanzee, is probably a result of sexual selection by females looking for signs of good health in prospective mates. The reliance of the human penis solely on hydraulic means to achieve a rigid state makes it particularly vulnerable to blood pressure variation. Poor erectile function betrays not only physical states such as diabetes and neurological disorders but mental states such as stress and depression."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baculum

sounds right to me. what other sexually selective pressures might influence the appearance or function of human penises? for example, is size something that is selectable, as breast size is? it's not visible, so that's a primary difference.

posted in Evolution - 23 replies

darwinmania begins

2008-07-24T09:42:03Z

http://judson.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/darwinmania/

posted in Evolution - 4 replies

those who say nothing are forthwith challenged!!!

2008-07-21T23:40:22Z

why belong to this tribe and say absolutely nothing ever? 354 members?? where are you? come on people!! evolution is a hot topic!!! doesn't anyone have a question? even on the most basic level? this is not a tribe for experts -- i am far from one, for example -- so let's get talking!

posted in Evolution - 9 replies

a chimp called matthew

2008-07-17T05:17:26Z

In Austria, animal activists have taken the case of a chimp called Matthew as far as the European Court of Human Rights. Controversially, they're fighting for his right to legal personhood....

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/allinthemind/stories/2008/2290721.htm

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

frequency dependent evolution

2008-07-09T02:21:19Z

it's really dawning on me how various a population may be with some traits, and how their frequencies may depend on each other. i've fallen into the trap sometimes of considering whether a trait is simply an adaptation or not, and how, not whether it might be in relation to other adaptations. does anyone have any examples of frequency dependent evolution to share of interest?

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

female chimp sex sounds

2008-06-29T11:24:24Z

Female Chimpanzees Use Copulation Calls Flexibly to Prevent Social Competition

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0002431

fascinating stuff. makes me consider the phenomena among homos. sapiens, i mean.

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

Interesting study

2008-06-27T21:18:44Z

Saw this while catching up on the news

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1453010/new_study_on_birds_may_ruffle_scientists_feathers/

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

review of human origins

2008-06-23T12:15:35Z

The author concludes that...the evidence around limited genetic input from archaic humans like Neanderthals is still inconclusive. Nice review of the evidence for those who are interested.
--------------------------------------------------

Genetic evidence and the modern human origins debate
J H Relethford
Heredity (2008) 100: 555–563

ABSTRACT
A continued debate in anthropology concerns the evolutionary origin of 'anatomically modern humans' (Homo sapiens sapiens). Different models have been proposed to examine the related questions of (1) where and when anatomically modern humans first appeared and (2) the genetic and evolutionary relationship between modern humans and earlier human populations. Genetic data have been increasingly used to address these questions. Genetic data on living human populations have been used to reconstruct the evolutionary history of the human species by considering how global patterns of human variation could be produced given different evolutionary scenarios. Of particular interest are gene trees that reconstruct the time and place of the most recent common ancestor of humanity for a given haplotype and the analysis of regional differences in genetic diversity. Ancient DNA has also allowed a direct assessment of genetic variation in European Neandertals. Together with the fossil record, genetic data provide insight into the origin of modern humans. The evidence points to an African origin of modern humans dating back to 200 000 years followed by later expansions of moderns out of Africa across the Old World. What is less clear is what happened when these early modern humans met preexisting 'archaic human' populations outside of Africa. At present, it is difficult to distinguish between a model of total genetic replacement and a model that includes some degree of genetic mixture.

http://www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v100/n6/abs/hdy200814a.html

posted in Evolution - 3 replies

Mating system and eusociality

2008-06-06T04:02:58Z

Ancestral Monogamy Shows Kin Selection Is Key to the Evolution of Eusociality
William O. H. Hughes,1* Benjamin P. Oldroyd,2 Madeleine Beekman,2 Francis L. W. Ratnieks3

Close relatedness has long been considered crucial to the evolution of eusociality. However, it has recently been suggested that close relatedness may be a consequence, rather than a cause, of eusociality. We tested this idea with a comparative analysis of female mating frequencies in 267 species of eusocial bees, wasps, and ants. We found that mating with a single male, which maximizes relatedness, is ancestral for all eight independent eusocial lineages that we investigated. Mating with multiple males is always derived. Furthermore, we found that high polyandry (>2 effective mates) occurs only in lineages whose workers have lost reproductive totipotency. These results provide the first evidence that monogamy was critical in the evolution of eusociality, strongly supporting the prediction of inclusive fitness theory.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/320/5880/1213

posted in Evolution - 3 replies

Weigh in... your opinion, that is

2008-06-05T21:23:47Z

Discuss some interesting topics on CreateDebate like these:

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Is_there_a_conflict_in_believing_in_both_evolution_and_a_personal_god
http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Has_evolution_been_scientifically_proved
http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Do_staunch_creationists_understand_evolution
http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Should_creationism_be_taught_in_science_classes_in_public_schools
http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/What_came_first_The_chicken_or_the_egg
http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Faith_is_ignorance
http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Endangered_specied_deserve_extinction
http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/What_are_the_best_arguments_against_creationism
http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Does_creation_science_have_a_place_in_science_classes
http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Are_you_getting_tired_about_homosexuality_related_debates

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

What happened to Mark?

2008-06-05T21:04:10Z

Was Falwells passing too much for him? Or did he evolve into unsubscribed?

posted in Evolution - 30 replies

horizontal gene transfer in rotifers

2008-06-05T13:58:59Z

Massive Horizontal Gene Transfer in Bdelloid Rotifers
Eugene A. Gladyshev,1 Matthew Meselson,1,2* Irina R. Arkhipova1,2*

Horizontal gene transfer in metazoans has been documented in only a few species and is usually associated with endosymbiosis or parasitism. By contrast, in bdelloid rotifers we found many genes that appear to have originated in bacteria, fungi, and plants, concentrated in telomeric regions along with diverse mobile genetic elements. Bdelloid proximal gene-rich regions, however, appeared to lack foreign genes, thereby resembling those of model metazoan organisms. Some of the foreign genes were defective, whereas others were intact and transcribed; some of the latter contained functional spliceosomal introns. One such gene, apparently of bacterial origin, was overexpressed in Escherichia coli and yielded an active enzyme. The capture and functional assimilation of exogenous genes may represent an important force in bdelloid evolution.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/320/5880/1210

posted in Evolution - 2 replies

clammy shenannigans

2008-06-05T13:48:23Z

ALL-MALE ASEXUALITY: ORIGIN AND
MAINTENANCE OF ANDROGENESIS IN THE
ASIAN CLAM CORBICULA
Shannon M. Hedtke,1,2 Kathrin Stanger-Hall,1,3,4 Robert J. Baker,5,6,7 and David M. Hillis,1,8,9
Evolution 62-5: 1119–1136

Androgenesis is a rare form of asexual male reproduction found in disparate taxa across the Tree of Life. Phylogenetic analyses
of mitochondrial genes suggest that androgenesis has arisen repeatedly in the Asian clam genus Corbicula. Two of these
androgenetic species have been introduced to North America. Multiple lines of genetic evidence suggest that although nuclear
recombination between these two species is rare, mitochondrial genome capture is a frequent consequence of androgenetic parasitism
of heterospecific eggs. Egg parasitism may also rarely result in partial nuclear genome capture between closely related
species of Corbicula, which provides a mechanism for the otherwise clonal species to avoid the deleterious effects of asexuality.
Egg parasitism among congeners may explain why androgenesis has been maintained in Corbicula after fixation and has not
yet led to population extinction. This mechanism also provides an explanation for the apparent multiple origins of androgenesis
in Corbicula as seen on the mitochondrial DNA phylogeny. We suggest that a single androgenetic lineage may have repeatedly
captured mitochondrial genomes (as well as portions of nuclear genomes) from various sexual species, resulting in several distinct
androgenetic species with distantly related mtDNA genomes and divergent morphologies.

posted in Evolution - 2 replies

inter-sexual conflict of interests

2008-06-05T13:31:08Z

POSTCOPULATORY FERTILIZATION BIAS AS A
FORM OF CRYPTIC SEXUAL SELECTION
Ryan Calsbeek1,2 and Camille Bonneaud3,4
Evolution 62-5: 1137–1148

Males and females share most of their genetic material yet often experience very different selection pressures. Some traits that are
adaptive when expressed in males may therefore be maladaptive when expressed in females. Recent studies demonstrating negative
correlations in fitness between parents and their opposite-sex progeny suggest that natural selection may favor a reduction
in trait correlations between the sexes to partially mitigate intralocus sexual conflict. We studied sex-specific forms of selection
acting in Anolis lizards in the Greater Antilles, a group for which the importance of natural selection has been well documented
in species-level diversification, but for which less is known about sexual selection. Using the brown anole (Anolis sagrei), we
measured fitness-related variation in morphology (body size), and variation in two traits reflecting whole animal physiological
condition: running endurance and immune function. Correlations between body size and physiological traits were opposite between
males and females and the form of natural selection acting on physiological traits significantly differed between the sexes.
Moreover, physiological traits in progeny were correlated with the body-size of their sires, but correlations were null or even
negative between parents and their opposite-sex progeny. Although results based on phenotypic and genetic correlations, as well
as the action of natural selection, suggest the potential for intralocus sexual conflict, females used sire body size as a cue to sort
sperm for the production of either sons or daughters. Our results suggest that intralocus sexual conflict may be at least partly
resolved through post-copulatory sperm choice in A. sagrei.

posted in Evolution - 5 replies

monotreme evolution

2008-06-05T01:47:21Z

Genome analysis of the platypus reveals unique signatures of evolution
(Um...the list of authors is on the paper. And this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen--I actually tried to count the authors and gave up.)

ABSTRACT
We present a draft genome sequence of the platypus, Ornithorhynchus anatinus. This monotreme exhibits a fascinating combination of reptilian and mammalian characters. For example, platypuses have a coat of fur adapted to an aquatic lifestyle; platypus females lactate, yet lay eggs; and males are equipped with venom similar to that of reptiles. Analysis of the first monotreme genome aligned these features with genetic innovations. We find that reptile and platypus venom proteins have been co-opted independently from the same gene families; milk protein genes are conserved despite platypuses laying eggs; and immune gene family expansions are directly related to platypus biology. Expansions of protein, non-protein-coding RNA and microRNA families, as well as repeat elements, are identified. Sequencing of this genome now provides a valuable resource for deep mammalian comparative analyses, as well as for monotreme biology and conservation.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7192/abs/nature06936.html

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

evolution: 24 myths and misconceptions

2008-05-13T23:57:06Z

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13620-evolution-24-myths-and-misconceptions.html?DCMP=ILC-tabView&nsref=dn13620

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

Dinosaur-bird connection confirmed

2008-04-26T04:30:44Z

Tyrannosaurus rex just got a firm grip on the animal kingdom's family tree, right next to chickens and ostriches. New analyses of soft tissue from a T.rex leg bone re-confirm that birds are dinosaurs' closest living relatives.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20080424/sc_livescience/gunkintrexfossilconfirmsdinobirdlineage

posted in Evolution - 2 replies

Crusaders 'left genetic legacy'

2008-04-23T13:25:11Z

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7316281.stm

Scientists have detected the faint genetic traces left by medieval crusaders in the Middle East.

The team says they found a particular DNA signature which recently appeared in Lebanon and is probably linked to the crusades.

The finding comes from the Genographic Project, a major effort to track human migrations through DNA.

Details of the research have been published in the American Journal of Human Genetics.

The researchers found that some Christian men in Lebanon carry a DNA signature hailing from Western Europe.

The scientists also found that Lebanese Muslim men were more likely than Christians to carry a particular genetic signature. But this one is linked to expansions from the Arabian Peninsula which brought Islam to the area in the 7th and 8th Centuries.

But they emphasise that the differences between the two communities are minor, and that Christians and Muslim Arabs in Lebanon overwhelmingly share a common heritage.

Genetic 'surname'

The legacy of the Muslim expansion has been demonstrated in other studies which looked at the genetics of Middle Eastern and North African populations. But signs of recent European migration to the region is more unusual.

The study focused on the Y, or male, chromosome, a package of genetic material carried only by men that is passed down from father to son more or less unchanged, just like a surname.

But over many generations, the chromosome accumulates small changes, or copying errors, in its DNA sequence.

So Y chromosomes can be classified into different groups (called haplogroups) which, to some extent, reflect a person's geographical ancestry.

The team analysed the Y chromosomes of 926 Lebanese males and found that patterns of male genetic variation in Lebanon fell more along religious lines than along geographical lines.

A genetic signature on the male chromosome called WES1, which is usually only found in European populations, was found among the Lebanese men included in the study.

Science and history

"It seems to have come in from Europe and is found mostly in the Christian population," said Dr Spencer Wells, director of the Genographic Project.

"This is odd because typically we don't see this sort of stratification by religion when we are looking at the relative proportions of these lineages - and particularly immigration events."

He told BBC News: "Looking at the same data set, we saw a similar enrichment of lineages coming in from the Arabian Peninsula in the Muslim population which we didn't see [as often] in the Christian population."

Lebanese Muslim men were found to have high frequencies of a Y chromosome grouping known as J1. This is typical of populations originating from the Arabian Peninsula, who were involved in the Muslim expansion.

"The goal of the study was to put some science to the history of this country - which is very rich," said Pierre Zalloua, a co-author on the paper, from the Lebanese American University in Beirut.

He added: "To have these great civilizations - with the Islamic expansion and the migration from Europe - coming to Lebanon, leaving not only their genes but also some of their culture and way of life, it can only make us feel richer."

The Genographic Project was launched by National Geographic in 2005 to help piece together a picture of how the Earth was colonised.

The consortium has sold 250,000 DNA test kits and regional centers have taken samples of genetic material from 31,000 indigeous people.

Story from BBC NEWS:

posted in Evolution - 15 replies

from Ostara -to Easter

2008-03-20T18:15:55Z

where the bunnies and eggs come from, or how easter elvolved...

2008 Vernal Equinox begins 3/20 at 05:57 UT
(12:57 am EST, where i'm at)

Wishing you all an safe, abundant season,
enjoy this Beautiful Ostara egg i saved for you...
Hearts, Gratitde and Blessings

www.youtube.com/watch

Siz'l

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

Shouting during sex!

2008-01-03T18:14:35Z

Have a howling good holiday season and new year ahead, everyone!

; )

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Study Reveals Why Monkeys Shout During Sex

By Charles Q. Choi, Special to LiveScience

posted: 18 December 2007 08:33 pm ET

Female monkeys may shout during sex to help their male partners climax, research now reveals.

Without these yells, male Barbary macaques (Macaca sylvanus) almost never ejaculated, scientists found.

Female monkeys often utter loud, distinctive calls before, during or after sex. Their exact function, if any, has remained heavily debated.

Counting pelvic thrusts

To investigate the purpose behind these calls, scientists at the German Primate Center in Göttingen focused on Barbary macaques for two years in a nature reserve in Gibraltar.

The researchers found that females yelled during 86 percent of all sexual encounters. When females shouted, males ejaculated 59 percent of the time. However, when females did not holler, males ejaculated less than 2 percent of the time.

To see if yelling resulted from how vigorous the sex was, the scientists counted the number of pelvic thrusts males gave and timed when they happened. They found when shouting occurred, thrusting increased. In other words, hollering led to more vigorous sex.

Counting monkey pelvic thrusts is admittedly "quite weird, but it's science," researcher Dana Pfefferle, a behavioral scientist and primatologist at the German Primate Center, told LiveScience. "You get used to it."

Quite promiscuous

Male and female Barbary macaques are promiscuous, often having sex with many partners. This means sperm levels can get quite drained. The females shout when they are most fertile, so males can make the most use of their sperm.

Pfefferle noted her research suggests these calls might also make females more attractive to other males. She added these shouts might play different roles in other species.

Pfefferle and her colleagues detailed their findings online Dec. 18 in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Photos and links at:

www.livescience.com/animals/...call.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted
material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to
advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral,
ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’
of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C.
section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.
Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to
those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use
copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go
beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

posted in Evolution - 7 replies

the return of group selectionism

2008-01-03T02:32:26Z

holy shit. it has returned. e.o. wilson is on the verge of publishing a book called "the superorganism" that argues in favor of multilevel selection, including group. others are following suit. sure, they are saying it is "emergent" from standard selection, but here's the gist, in relation to altruism: within a group, selfishness prevails, between groups, altruism prevails. hmm.

http://discovermagazine.com/2006/jun/e-o-wilson

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/mg19626281.500

the full article will be in the December issue of Quarterly Review of Biology, titled "Rethinking the Theoretical Foundation of Sociobiology."

i'm still chewing on this. any thoughts?

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

further evolution is possible in this lifetime!!!

2007-12-30T04:02:35Z

Humans are unlike all other forms of life. Most animals are relatively the same as their relatives, however, humans vary dramatically from person to person. No other species has the possibility of such drastic changes depending on experience. People have a unique opportunity to develop their minds in whatever way they want. You can be a television head or a mushroom head, a martial arts master or a masturbation master, a workaholic or a lazy bum, a video game playing loser or an enlightened self-torturer, a conservative or an anarchist, a hermit or a socializer, a celibate or a sexaholic, a mystic or a misfit, a pothead or a dope fiend, a sane normal or a Sane radical, a conformist or a revolutionary, high or low. It's your choice. Change yourself into what you want to be. I recommend enlightenment.

posted in Evolution - 10 replies

making a mate unattractive to others

2007-12-12T01:09:15Z

anyone know of any practices in any species wherein a mated individual is made less attractive to other possible mates, by their mate?

i just could see how such a strategy might show up somewhere. like in a middle-aged man's gut? hahaha

posted in Evolution - 22 replies

evolution of minds has led to this remarkable discovery!

2007-12-09T00:23:58Z

http://tribes.tribe.net/stemcellsgivelife

COME to LEARN & PLEASE help me spread the "truthidy! ;)*

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

"Artificial Life" inching closer to reality

2007-11-28T15:35:36Z

I am creating artificial life, declares US gene pioneer

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/oct/06/genetics.climatechange

Craig Venter, the controversial DNA researcher involved in the race to decipher the human genetic code, has built a synthetic chromosome out of laboratory chemicals and is poised to announce the creation of the first new artificial life form on Earth.

The announcement, which is expected within weeks and could come as early as Monday at the annual meeting of his scientific institute in San Diego, California, will herald a giant leap forward in the development of designer genomes. It is certain to provoke heated debate about the ethics of creating new species and could unlock the door to new energy sources and techniques to combat global warming.

Mr Venter told the Guardian he thought this landmark would be "a very important philosophical step in the history of our species. We are going from reading our genetic code to the ability to write it. That gives us the hypothetical ability to do things never contemplated before".

posted in Evolution - 3 replies

Evolutionary Risk Distribution Law Identified

2007-11-05T15:55:48Z

Evolutionary Risk Distribution Law Identified
http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20071004204540data_trunc_sys.shtml

Taking a "chance" is one of the impulses that drives evolution. But when do cells retain specific gene sequences, and when do they allow evolution to experiment with them? Now, new research from the Weizmann Institute indicates that a sort of "risk distribution law" is in effect.

Prof. Naama Barkai of the Weizmann Institute's Molecular Genetics Department recently took a look at gene expression... So, how does evolution "decide" which genes need to be conserved, and which it can change freely? What keeps these genes safe from the ongoing experimentation that's constantly carried out on other genes?

Barkai says her team have discovered a sort of "risk distribution law" for evolution. They found that a genetic "phrase" that regularly shows up in the promoter region of genes (the bit of genetic code responsible for activating the gene) contains a key to gene conservation: The expression of a gene that contains the sequence TATA in its promoter is more likely to have evolved than that of a gene that does not have TATA in its promoter. In other words, the level of risk appears to be written in the gene code, in a way that's similar to financial risk analysis: When the cost of error is high, an investor's willingness to chance the risk is low, but if the cost of a mistake is negligible, even if the chance of making one is high, the possibility of gain may make the risk worthwhile. Evolution, it seems, discovered this principle millions of years before the stock market.

In a different study, Barkai investigated the effects of a drastic evolutionary experiment that nature sometimes performs on living cells: the doubling of an entire genome. She looked at two related species of yeast, one of which (S. cerevisiae) had undergone genome doubling millions of years ago. After the duplication, cerevisiae seem to have learned a new trick: it gained the ability to grow and multiply without oxygen.

To discover whether this difference is connected to changes in gene expression, the team tested 50 genes that play a role in processing oxygen in both species. They discovered one gene segment - a bit responsible for expression of these genes - that had changed in the course of the genome doubling in cerevisiae. The effects of this change were seen in over 50 genes and dramatically affected the oxygen requirements of the yeast. The ability to live without oxygen might give cerevisiae a clear advantage over its sister yeast if there were a radical change in the make-up of the Earth's atmosphere. But it is exactly this combination of environmental change and genetic experimentation that has fueled evolution for millions of years and is still driving it today.

Related articles:
DNA Error Tolerance Points To Life's Warm Beginnings
http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20050709222415data_trunc_sys.shtml

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

green beard?

2007-11-02T04:59:10Z

i don't get how this is a green beard gene. where's the altruism? someone help me understand this please!

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v394/n6693/abs/394573a0.html

"Nature 394, 573-575 (6 August 1998) | doi:10.1038/29064; Received 7 November 1997; Accepted 29 May 1998

Selfish genes: a green beard in the red fire ant

Laurent Keller1 and Kenneth G. Ross2

Institute of Zoology and Animal Ecology, University of Lausanne, Bâtiment de Biologie, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602-2603, USA
Correspondence to: Laurent Keller1 Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to L.K. (e-mail: Email: Laurent.Keller@izea.unil.ch).

Top of page
A 'green-beard' gene is defined as a gene that causes a phenotypic effect (such as the presence of a green beard or any other conspicuous feature), allows the bearer of this feature to recognize it in other individuals, and causes the bearer to behave differently towards other individuals depending on whether or not they possess the feature1, 2, 3. Such genes have been proposed on theoretical grounds to be agents mediating both altruism and intragenomic conflicts1,2, but until now few, if any, of these genes have been identified4,5. Here we provide evidence of a green-beard gene in the red imported fire ant, Solenopsis invicta. In polygyne (multiple-queen) colonies, all egg-laying queens are Bb heterozygotes at the locus Gp-9 (ref. 6). Previous studies suggested that bb females die prematurely from intrinsic causes6; we now show that BB queens initiating reproduction are killed by workers, and that it is primarily Bb rather than BB workers that are responsible for these executions. This implies that allele Gp-9b is linked to a green-beard allele that preferentially induces workers bearing the allele to kill all queens that do not bear it. Workers appear to distinguish BB from Bb queens on the basis of a transferable odour cue."

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

coping with cope's rule

2007-10-12T01:28:42Z

what the eff is up with cope's rule? i can't see why it would be true, personally, and i'm really not so sure it is. anyone care to chime in on this? why would larger creatures tend to survive better? in what kind of environment? competing with whom? seems to me that the majority of creatures on earth are tiny!

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

semelparity conditions

2007-09-30T14:43:04Z

under what pressures do semelparous species evolve? is it partly a matter of parents competing for resources with their offspring?

posted in Evolution - 12 replies

Wikispecies

2007-09-25T02:15:41Z

http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

Wikispecies is a wiki-based online project supported by the Wikimedia Foundation that aims to create a comprehensive free content catalogue of all species (including animalia, plantae, fungi, bacteria, archaea, and protista). It is aimed at scientists, rather than at the general public.

posted in Evolution - 3 replies

A component of DNA might survive space

2007-09-15T00:54:37Z

Life’s ingredients may have ‘sprinkled’ on Earth
A component of DNA might survive space and sprinkle onto planets
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20724322/

Some crucial ingredients for life on Earth may have formed in interstellar space, rather than on the planet's surface.

A new computer model indicates clouds of adenine molecules, a basic component of DNA, can form and survive the harsh conditions of space, and possibly sprinkle onto planets as the stars they orbit travel through a galaxy.

"There may be only a few molecules of adenine per square foot of space, but over millions of years, enough could have accumulated to help make way for life," said study co-author Rainer Glaser, a molecular chemist at the University of Missouri-Columbia.

Glaser and his team's findings are detailed in a recent issue of the journal Astrobiology.

Spacey chemistry
Adenine is one of four "letters" of DNA's alphabet used to store an organism's genetic code. Glaser said the idea that large, two-ringed organic molecules like adenine formed in space may seem outrageous, but current evidence leaves the possibility wide open.

"You can find large molecules in meteorites, including adenine," Glaser said. "We know that adenine can be made elsewhere in the solar system, so why should one consider it impossible to make the building blocks somewhere in interstellar dust?"

Using computer simulations of the cold vacuum of space, Glaser and his colleagues found that hydrogen cyanide gas can build adenine. Like pieces in a set of tinker toys, hydrogen cyanide serves as adenine's building blocks; the small molecules bond together into chains and, with a little wiggling, eventually assemble into rings.

Although adenine's first ring needs a tiny energy boost from starlight to form, Glaser said the second ring of the molecule self-assembles without any outside help.

"When you want to have a reaction, you usually need to heat it up," Glaser said. "It's remarkable to find a reaction that doesn't require activation energy. If you do this reaction in space, this is a huge advantage because it takes a long time for a molecule to be hit by a piece of light."

Glaser said adenine's ringed shape helps it absorb and release any excess energy without breaking apart, making it stable enough to form concentrated clouds that planets can drift through.

While getting adenine safely onto a rocky planet's surface is a less developed idea, Glaser said many chemists have barely toyed with the notion that life's basic ingredients formed off of the planet's surface.

"We're at a very early stage of anybody even thinking about these things," he said. "The discussion of life's origin has been highly focused on the idea of a warm pool of liquid on the planet's surface." But Glaser said recent discoveries of planets around distant stars is changing that focus.

"Chemistry in space isn't the chemistry most of us are trained for," Glaser said. "We should take a much bigger approach: Where are all the chemicals in the galaxy and its solar systems, and what can you do with them?"

Antonio Lazcano, an evolutionary biologist at the National Autonomous University of Mexico who has studied life origins for the past 30 years, said Glaser and his colleagues' work is compelling.

"We already know hydrogen cyanide is abundant in interstellar clouds, and it's been suggested that comets can bring some of that material onto planets," Lazcano said. For Glaser and his team's idea to be widely supported, however, adenine needs to be detected in the deep space clouds, Lazcano said.

"The likelihood of detection is very small, but it's still possible," he said. "If astronomers can better eliminate background noise, I think we'll have equipment sensitive enough to detect adenine dust clouds."

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

Casual talk about the digital structure of the universe and origin of life

2007-09-06T08:09:55Z

http://www.edge.org/video/dsl/EF2007_SethLloyd.html

MIT researcher Seth Lloyd gives an informal talk about the "digital" nature of the universe and thus life. Interesting. Enjoy.

This is part of the recent: LIFE: WHAT A CONCEPT! [8.27.07]
http://www.edge.org/

posted in Evolution - 1 reply

"Darwin's Deadly Legacy" A new "documentary" from religious fundamentalists

2007-09-05T20:52:56Z

Ah, the old standby: when you want to discredit an idea without actually considering it, link it to Hitler. This program includes expert input from such notable intellectuals as Ann Coulter.

Link: http://www.coralridge.org/darwin/connection.asp?ID=crm&ec=I1301

Ann Coulter is stunned. How is it, she asks, that she could go through 12 years of public school, then college and law school, and still not know that it was Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution that fueled Hitler’s ovens.

“I never knew about the link between Darwin and Hitler until after reading Richard Weikart’s book,” said Coulter, a popular conservative columnist and a featured expert on the new Coral Ridge Hour documentary, Darwin’s Deadly Legacy, which airs August 25 and 26. Hitler, she said, “was applying Darwinism. He thought the Aryans were the fittest and he was just hurrying natural selection along.”

Coulter is among those who appear on Darwin’s Deadly Legacy, a disturbing look at the historical impact of the theory of evolution and the shaky scientific ground on which it rests.

Other guests on the program include Richard Weikart, author of From Darwin to Hitler, Lee Strobel, author of The Case for a Creator; Jonathan Wells, author of Icons of Evolution; Phillip Johnson, author of Darwin on Trial; Michael Behe, author of Darwin’s Black Box, and Ian Taylor, author of In the Minds of Men. “Among German historians, there’s really not much debate about whether or not Hitler was a social Darwinist,” said Weikart. “He clearly was drawing on Darwinian ideas.”

No Darwin, No Hitler
“To put it simply, no Darwin, no Hitler,” said Dr. Kennedy, the host of Darwin’s Deadly Legacy. “Hitler tried to speed up evolution, to help it along, and millions suffered and died in unspeakable ways because of it.”

But the social fallout from evolution has not been limited to Hitler. Eugenics, the idea that social engineers should monitor and manage choices to marry and have children, is the intellectual offspring of evolution. Darwin’s own cousin, Francis Galton, coined the term and campaigned for using human genetics as a means to breed a superior breed of humanity.

Eugenics took root in America in the early twentieth century—some 33 states adopted forced sterilization programs to prevent the “feeble-minded” and other “defectives” from reproducing. Planned Parenthood is a direct result of the eugenics movement in America. Its founder, Margaret Sanger, believed in removing what she called “the dead weight of human waste.” “Eugenics is applied Darwinism,” said Coulter. “And it sticks out like a sore thumb that all of these German eugenicists preceding the Nazi regime were enthusiastic Darwinists.”

Evolution is taught in every public school in America, and not without consequences, as Darwin’s Deadly Legacy documents. Columbine killers Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed 12 people and themselves in the worst school shooting in U.S. history. Their goal was to bring death to more than 500. Harris wrote on his website, “YOU KNOW WHAT I LOVE??? Natural SELECTION! It’s the best thing that ever happened to the Earth. Getting rid of all the stupid and weak organisms.”

The autopsy report for Harris revealed that on the day of the attack, he wore a T-shirt emblazoned with the words “Natural Selection.” Harris and Klebold, who planned their rampage for a year, paid homage to their hero, Adolf Hitler by carrying out their killing spree on April 20, Hitler’s birthday.

Grim Legacy
The legacy of Charles Darwin, Dr. Kennedy said, is “millions of deaths, the destruction of those deemed inferior, the devaluing of human life, and increasing hopelessness.” All this from a theory based on a crumbling scientific foundation—as the special makes plain.

“The time has come,” Dr. Kennedy said, “to recognize that evolution is a bad idea and should be, frankly, discarded into the dustbin of history.”

posted in Evolution - 7 replies

full parasite genome found within host genome

2007-09-05T16:35:52Z

"Scientists at the University of Rochester and the J. Craig Venter Institute have discovered a copy of the genome of a bacterial parasite residing inside the genome of its host species.

The research, reported in today's Science, also shows that lateral gene transfer—the movement of genes between unrelated species—may happen much more frequently between bacteria and multicellular organisms than scientists previously believed, posing dramatic implications for evolution.

Such large-scale heritable gene transfers may allow species to acquire new genes and functions extremely quickly, says Jack Werren, a principle investigator of the study."

http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=2963

saltationists, taste my pain!

posted in Evolution - 3 replies

Evolution "Debunked:" The Creation Museum

2007-08-30T17:46:54Z

I visited the new $27 million Creation Museum in Petersburg Kentucky (just south of Cincinnati) last weekend. I didn’t go in order to gawk, or to argue with people, or to protest. I went because I have a genuine interest in how museum space can be used and what museums can do, and I went because I thought I could take one for the team (you all) and come back to report on it. What follows is divided into two parts: first, a summation of the social conditions which led to such a museum to exist in modern America (I assume that most of the comparatively educated and progressive members of the tribe are not all that familiar with the ins and outs of Biblical fundamentalism as a social movement; this section is pulled largely from a paper I wrote some months ago), and second, a description of the museum, section by section, with some of my personal comments. If you’re not interested in a long prologue, then skip down to the series of dashed lines. But if you have an interest in trying to understand what these fundamentalists are trying to accomplish, then read the prologue. Hopefully, this will stimulate some discussion.

…………………………………………………………………………………………….

The recent proliferation of so-called Creation Science museums in the United States is the result of a kind of anticolonialist social action; not anticolonialist in terms of foreign domination, but rather in terms of cognitive domination. The preponderance of evolutionary and geological science in the social discourse has alienated much of the fundamentalist Christian population, and it has traditionally responded by challenging the practice of teaching evolutionary theory in public schools, most famously in the Scopes “Monkey Trial” of 1925. Since their defeat in that trial, the Biblical literalists have continued to seek legal injunctions against evolution in the public sphere while simultaneously constructing their own epistemological framework for insertion into the social discourse. One of the latest manifestations of this epistemological framework is the museum of creation science. Creation Science is a conscious effort to appropriate elements of sound science into a pre-existing narrative about the origins and operations of the universe. These museums are the site of social resistance against prevailing scientific norms, repositories of collective memory, tools of legitimization for a particular narrative, and the latest front in the “Culture Wars.”

Museums are the repositories of knowledge and ways of knowing in society. They reflect and perpetuate social discourse in such a way as to enshrine narratives of history, society, and the relationship of the individual to that society. They are the site of social power and enforcement, particularly when they are sustained by ruling political institutions. Chief among the powers of the museum is its role as archive, and the primary archive in museums of creation science is the King James translation of the Bible.

An archive is any system of statements articulating conditions for reality; it constitutes the rules for what can be said and what can be learned. As such, the archive is a collection of judgments through which mediation guides discourse. An archive is necessarily a physical thing resulting from cognitive realities; it has a location, it contains data, but it is inscribed in a sociological framework. It contains iconic and indexical references, and it therefore has a wide range of meanings due to these connections. Though an archive is consciously constructed, its meanings are contingent upon interpretation and association. Control of the organization of the archive and control of the meaning of the archive constitute a potent form of social power which is manifest in the institution of the museum.

Museums themselves represent imposed order. The establishment of an archive in a museum is an effort to etch it into permanent memory. The regimes of truth underlying an archive determine the production of knowledge and define correct knowledge. For example, China’s Cultural Revolution sought to create archives which rearticulated social order and relegated parts of the consciousness of its citizens (i.e. religious belief) to elements of the past. That which is relegated to the past is defined as having passed, no matter how present it may yet be. Social narratives and museums in Japan have excluded the presence and culture of the native Ainu people because their existence in Japan before the formulation of traditional ethnic Japanese mythology was unthinkable. The archive can both mirror collective memories and erase others through its function as the site of mediation.

In contrast to historical memory, which is subject to verification, analysis, and revision, collective memory is based upon social myth. Collective memory reduces the human experience to its essentials, retaining the useful and reinforcing elements while discarding those elements which are perceived as dangerous or uncomfortable. Because collective memory is so mutable, the archive is a social technology to enshrine memory in ostensibly unchanging forms. Thus collective memory is codified and canonized into a social discourse.

Traditional Foucaldian views of museums as sites of social power tend to interpret that power as being foisted upon colonial subjects. This is the metaphor of modernity itself (or “globalization”) as a colonizing influence and the model of museums as a “top-down” imposition of power. Under this model, the powerful otherize the less powerful and perpetuate their own social discourse. However, museums can be important statements of power by disadvantaged groups who attempt to reclaim and reestablish their own discourse. The community-based museum can serve to bolster and legitimize local or disenfranchised groups. New Museology, informed by the effects of colonialism (and reactions against it), is focused not on the practices of museums but rather their political dimensions and social implications, focusing on the museum’s relationship to the community and maintaining the curator’s role as facilitator. The museum becomes the site of resistance to power as well as a purveyor of power.

New Museology frames museums as necessarily “ideas-based” rather than “object-based.” As such, the creation of a museum begins with narratives as a representation of a story rather than with objects as a representation of a people. Visiting a museum is a social activity which not only recovers the past but also explains the present. The important part is not the collections of things, but rather the collections of people and their shared experience.

The development of museums has not followed a linear progression; each museum has its own origin and function. Creation museums grew out of an existing epistemological framework and social discourse which took shape shortly after the Scopes “Monkey” trial in 1925, in which evolutionary theory was officially sanctioned in public schools. The fundamentalist Christian community reacted strongly to the ruling because they saw evolutionary theory as conflicting with their religious beliefs. The perceived assault from courts and secular interests galvanized the fundamentalist community. William Jennings Bryan, despite having lost the case, was elevated to hero (martyr?) status in Christian fundamentalist circles.

Briefly, fundamentalist Christians adhere to a strict and literal interpretation of the Biblical narrative. Their holy texts form the epistemological foundation for their worldview, which can not be falsified in their view. They approach the universe and their place in it from a deductive standpoint (wherein the Bible forms the only absolute truth and objective reality is subject to that truth), rather than an inductive viewpoint (wherein facts and evidence are collected and truth is based on a preponderance of evidence). According to the strict creationist model, the earth and all life were created willfully by supernatural forces, the earth’s history is dominated by catastrophism rather than gradual change, and the complexity of the universe has steadily decayed since the perfect original creation. According to creationists, the geologic time scale is a construction of the minds of geologists and that humankind is the purpose of the natural world rather than a result of it. A complete evaluation of the creationist arguments is beyond the scope of this discussion, and it is irrelevant to the way in which the museums of creation science function. The creation science movement is a social reality, regardless of its merits. However, the relevant elements are how scientific creationism appropriates and re-classifies scientific knowledge for its own purposes and for its museums.

Creationists are strongly motivated to promote antievolutionism because they believe it to be a matter of their (and others’) eternal souls. For them, scientific knowledge is only acceptable insofar as it is able to pass through a screen of preexisting ideology, whether religious or political. William Jennings Bryan, perennial presidential candidate and lead prosecutor in the Scopes trial, famously remarked in 1925, “When the Bible and the microscope disagree, the microscope is wrong.” Even when scientific ideas do not directly contradict religious views and are instead conflated with undesirable political associations, they are rejected out of hand. Henry R. Morris, a creationist leader and author, wrote in 1963, “Evolution is at the foundation of communism, fascism, Freudianism, social Darwinism, behaviorism, Kinseyism, materialism, atheism, and in the religious world, modernism and neo-orthodoxy.” This litany of fearful “isms” well articulates the visceral reaction of creationists to principles even remotely connected (or perceived to be connected) with evolutionary thought.

Since 1925, creationists have been assembling and disseminating their own message to combat what they perceive as the danger of evolutionism. This siege mentality among creationists strengthened after the US reaction to the Soviet launch of Sputnik in the 1950s. In order to close the knowledge gap between the Soviets and the United States, the federal government enhanced funding of K-12 public education, including explicit education in school textbooks of evolution as the cornerstone of the biological sciences. Even worse for the creationists, these moves were given the National Science Foundation’s seal of approval. From the perspective of the creationists, they had been betrayed by the government and its endorsement of evolutionary principles. Both the government and its associated agencies became enemies, and all faith in public education was lost.

The response of the creationists was threefold. First, they adopted a stance of social action. Because the scientific community at large was wary of the popularization of scientific knowledge, it was loath to engage in social discourse directly. This social vacuum was readily filled by a plethora of creationist writings which situated pseudoscientific arguments as social imperatives. Second, the creationists began appropriating scientific knowledge and terminology into their own parallel discourse in order to compete with science in the marketplace of ideas; in other words, they began to look at where the Bible and the microscope agreed. Third, they continued legal challenges to evolution education and embarked on a political campaign to disparage those who ruled against them.

Scientific Creationist literature developed into its own genre throughout the 20th century. George McCready’s The New Geology (1923) promoted the idea of a literal six-day creation of the universe and contested the old-earth model of James Hutton, who famously wrote that the earth, with all its layered history has “No vestige of a beginning and no prospect of an end” in the 18th century. Excavations by Langdona at Kish and Wooley at Ur purported to show evidence of the Biblical flood in ancient Mesopotamia. Henry M. Morris, the director of the Institution for Creation Research, published Scientific Creationism (1974), Many Infallible Proofs (1974), and The Beginning of the World (1977), in which he included carefully chosen aspects of science, Biblical prophecy, history, and personal witnessing as evidence of creation. Phillip Johnson, who still holds an endowed chair at UC-Berkeley, published Darwin on Trial in 1991 and Reason in the Balance in 1995.

These publications cherrypicked the discourse of scientific thought in formulating the discourse of scientific creationism. To begin with, the appropriation of the very word “science” serves to legitimize and bolster the arguments of creationism by its association with rigor, peer review, and the strength of falsifiability, even though scientific creationism bears none of it. Falsifiability is completely anathema to creation science because it is based upon the eternal and unerring truth of a literal reading of the King James Bible. Furthermore, “science” carries with it the promise of status, recognition, and advancement. It also has an attractive predicative quality which is transferred to divine prophecy within the space of a Creation Science museum. Scientific creationists attempted to win “equal time” for creationism in public school classrooms as a topic of equal merit to evolution, and some others backpedaled to the position of “Intelligent Design,” which is an essentially deist and non-denominational philosophy.

Established scientific arguments were cherry picked for bits of evidence which could help verify creationist ideas such as the cataclysmic Flood. The fossil record, particularly those fossils of marine origin embedded in sedimentary rock, was re-interpreted as victims of the Flood while ignoring such scientific evidence as plate tectonics, radioisotope dating, and stratigraphy. They championed the Paluxy River hoax in which human footprints were carved alongside Cretaceous dinosaur tracks in Texas, claiming it as proof that humans and dinosaurs coexisted. They offered the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics as evidence against evolution. The 2nd law states that the entropy of the universe is steadily increasing, and the creationists argued that because evolution represents increasing levels of order, then it is in violation of that Law. However, they did not consider that the earth is not a closed system (it receives a constant influx of energy and material from the sun and from space), and it is therefore in thermal equilibrium.

These arguments, combined with the frustration of receiving little governmental money for research as a form of recognition, formed the intellectual foundation and conditions for the emergence of museums of Creation Science by constructing an alternate worldview which challenged the hegemony of science.

As a site of resistance, museums of Creation Science challenge rationalism and otherize secularism while legitimizing creationism and directing social discourse. As “bottom-up” museums, their social contexts are more present. The entire construction of meaning is intended to fetishize the narrative; the narrative of literalist Biblical creation and its inerrant truth is the essential quality of these museums. Unlike other museums, there is complete suspension of disbelief in a museum of Creation Science: a retention, reinforcement, and affirmation of a specific belief. The gaze of visitors does not operate independently, but rather it is directed as a reflection of an internalized narrative. The museum is not a window on the natural world, but rather a mirror on the visitors. Only the “others” of rationality, materialism, and evolutionism are challenged. Archives are constructed and reflective of an epistemological framework, and the archive of a creationist museum is more explicit in its agenda than most.

Creation Science museums are organized from a necessarily essentialist viewpoint dependent upon the assumption of the unchanging truth of the Bible. As such, the objects within the museum only have power and meaning insofar as they can fit into this narrative of a universal history. Stones, fossils, animals, and human artifacts are interpreted relative to their assigned role according to a literalist reading of the Bible. As with any museum collection, the display of objects entails a recoding and valuation of those objects. These objects are contextualized not as natural objects, but as artifacts of a creator. This recoding means that items which would otherwise have no intrinsic value are inserted in to the archive as demonstrative of elements of the overarching narrative. Just as a text can be read, objects can be read as mirroring and verifying the text. The only means of verification are the extent to which the objects can be interpreted to be in agreement with the narrative.

The narrative myth of a museum of Creation Science can be interpreted as a way to exploit the mental capacities that are neglected as a result of the current domination of by scientific thought. The narrative is intended to be comforting rather than merely explanatory. It preserves the emotional response to the universe which is lacking in a materialistic viewpoint. It represents understanding by means of intuition and faith rather than analysis, and it forms an alternate way of knowing.

In terms of objects originating from human material culture, museums of Creation Science form a type of folk archaeology. Mainstream archaeology draws its authority from connections with the hard sciences: chemistry, geology, physics, etc. Folk archaeology like those of Creation Science, Graham Hancock, and Eric Van Daniken, challenges archaeology’s authority to interpret the past. Emotional, ideological, and political factors contribute to the adoption of folk archaeology, whether Scientific Creationism or neo-paganism. It appeals to those who are not satisfied with the scientific narrative and those who find no comforting presence in the scientific model. Folk archaeology is a construction of meaning. Folk archaeology is not to be confused with traditional Biblical archaeology, however. The discipline of Biblical archaeology relies upon historical documents and artifacts which are more subject to the rigors of archaeological dating methods and interpretation. Biblical archaeology lies somewhere between folk archaeology and academic archaeology; it relies upon data and evidence, but it is still subject to a preexisting narrative.

Museums of natural history are essentially tombs. What lies within them cannot be resurrected. The objects within them are dead, and the narrative has been enacted. By contrast, museums of Creation Science are alive to visitors, filled with prophecy, revelation, inspiration, and evidence of a divine living presence. The museum speaks directly to visitors in a familiar and internalized dialogue rather than challenging them.

Contrary to what many secularists may believe, those who espouse Creation Science are not stupid. They understand the power and the social role of the museum, and they have been very successful in maintaining popular support in the United States. They use their museums as vehicles of creation and perpetuation of a particular kind of epistemology. These museums grew out of creationists’ failure to legally impose creationism in the public arenas of schools, libraries, museums, research facilities, and the courts. Meanwhile, evolution continues to merely be an academic discourse as Creation Science becomes a stronger social and political discourse. A 1996 poll of Americans found that only 44% of the population agreed with the following statement: Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals.” If scientists want to increase that number, they will need to use their well-funded museums as springboards into the social arena, despite their reluctance to enter the field of politics.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, about the Creation Museum. You can visit the museum website here: www.creationmuseum.org/

The museum is out in the middle of nowhere (some might say both physically and intellectually). A series of billboards and road signs along the highway direct visitors to the museum. The building is expansive, and the stone walls are lined with steel silhouettes of dinosaurs. I visited the day before Father’s Day, and I can’t say whether the packed parking lot was a result of having visited on a Saturday, whether it was a weekend, or whether the museum has been so busy since the opening. But the lots were filled with minivans and urban assault vehicles; bumpers were plastered with the ichthus and the “Truth” fish devouring the “Darwin” fish.

After stepping through the front doors, visitors face a high wall of moulded imitation stone mimicking the strata of the Grand Canyon. Following the wall to the ticket counter, visitors pass several tables with religious literature.

A word about admission: Here in New York, people scoff at high museum admissions prices. Unless a museum has a particularly amazing or valuable exhibit (such as AMNH’s “Gold!” exhibit), admission of $15 or more is seen as excessive. The cost of admission to the Creation Museum is $20 for adults (13 and up), $15 for seniors, $10 for children aged 5-12, and free for children under five. So, a family of five (many families I saw had more than three children) may have to shell out $80 just to get in the door. $120 if Grandma and Grandpa wish to join them. And if they want to see the 30 minute planetarium show, it’s another $5 per seat (I didn’t see the planetarium show because all tickets had been sold out by the time I got there shortly before 11 am). Granted, a table in front offers $5 off each ticket, but only if patrons give their name, address, and phone number to the museum (I’m looking forward to getting some creationist mail).

After having my ticket scanned, I enter into the main foyer of the museum. It is a high room with a preview of the life-sized Eden diorama: children sit near a babbling brook, with dinosaurs peacefully grazing nearby. The museum tour begins with a series of panels clearly outlining the organization of the tour. The tour, unguided and proceeding at the pace of each patron, is divided into sections based upon the “Seven Cs:” Creation, Corruption, Catastrophe, Confusion, Christ, Cross, and Consummation.

But before explaining the Seven Cs, a section with several rooms undermines the process of scientific inquiry and elevates literalist interpretation of the Bible above all other lines of reasoning. Chief among the aims of the museum is to promote the idea that the universe and the earth are only 6,000 years old and that the earth in its present form (post-flood), with its present flora and fauna, are only 4,300 years old.

The museum, like many others, crystallizes its message in the panels. Because this museum is an exposition of ideas rather than an exposition of objects, the panels are even more important. The panels are the true site of the museum, where all the ideas it tries to promote are articulated and where the complex intellectual acrobatics necessary in reconciling the observed natural world with Biblical narratives are laid out for all to read. The museum has an open photography policy, so I was able to get some good shots of the panels and exhibits.

One of the first sections of the “doubt factory” part of the museum features a large diorama of a paleontologist excavating a dinosaur fossil. The panels in this section are written to cast doubt on the scientifically determined age of the earth. One panel features an artificial sapphire and asks if this sapphire could have been assembled in a lab in a matter of days, then all sapphires in the earth could have formed in such a short time.

The next section is composed of a series of panels pitting “Human Reason” vs “God’s Word.” In one panel, a photograph of a stack of books (the usual suspects: Origin of Species, Newton’s Laws, The Communist Manifesto, Hutton’s Theory of the Earth, etc.) is juxtaposed against a singular Bible. This section clearly states that reason has no place in the proper approach to study of the natural world, and it explains that, depending upon one’s assumptions, she or he will reach different conclusions about the universe. If a person assumes that the universe developed over billions of years as a result of natural processes, she or he will lead a different sort of life than one who assumes that the Bible is the Word of God.

The museum organizers were quick in their display strategy to engage the emotions of the visitors. A wall-length panel titled “Do Different Starting Points Matter in Our Personal Lives?” has a series of pictures with subtitles: a woman crouched in an empty hallway (Does anyone care?), an old man slumped in a wheelchair (Am I alone?), Hurricane devastation and debris (Why do I suffer?), angry parents gesticulating at one another as a small boy holds his head in his hands (Is there any hope?).

The next room shows the role of the Bible and states that it is inerrant, eternal, consistent, and most importantly, constantly under siege. Visitors are first greeted with well-made, life-sized, and very European-looking models of the Patriarchs. The rest of the room explains the various attempts to “undermine” the truth of the Bible (or at least the interpretation of the truth of the Bible as interpreted by the museum creators). The panels explain how wrong and sinful it is to question the truth of the Bible in any way or to interpret the Bible as metaphor rather than an accurate ant literal account. Another life-sized diorama shows Martin Luther nailing his Theses to the church door, and an accompanying panel explains how, for centuries, demonic forces led the church (i.e., the Catholic Church) to “elevate tradition above God’s Word.” A wall mural and accompanying video on a flat screen television explain the evil unleashed in the Scopes Trial of 1925.

The Scopes exhibit then leads visitors into a dark hallway showing the depravity of the modern condition in which “God has been forcibly removed.” Visitors pass a graveyard mural with headstones reading “God is Dead,” “Truth,” “God’s Word,” and “Genesis.” Next, visitors walk down a corridor designed to look like an inner-city street, complete with graffiti, garbage, and audio of police sirens, violent crime, and the like. Two walls are plastered with photos and articles from popular magazines which touch on the hot-button issues for Christian fundamentalists in the US today: gay marriage, prayer in schools, abortion, stem cells, etc. Many of these pages are taken from publications like Newsweek (I am uploading a photo of one of these walls to the tribe album). At the end of the hallway is an installation of two structures: on the left is a suburban home with televisions set behind the windows, as if the viewers are looking inside the home. The televisions show family dissolution (kids playing violent video games and ignoring their parents, parents screaming at one another, a baby crying, etc). On the right is a section of a church wall being demolished by a wrecking ball labeled “Millions of Years.”

The next room of the museum presents an alternative model. It frames the natural world as a result of special creation. The room is bright, hopeful, and engaging. A series of backlit panels and explanatory videos on flat screens offer alternative views of the universe. This room kicks off the “Creation” section of the museum.

The next exhibit is a centerpiece of the museum: the walk-through Eden scene. You may have seen pictures of this section in articles about the museum. Life-sized animals, including dinosaurs and other extinct animals, populate the exhibit. Adam and Eve, with discreetly shielded naughty bits, repose peacefully in several scenes (there was some controversy recently over the man used as the model for Adam. Apparently, he had appeared in several gay porn films). The last scene shows Adam and Eve (clearly not Adam and Steve) bathing in a pool. Overhead, you-know-who looms in a tree. A panel describes the Biblical form of marriage: “Doctrine of Marriage – The special creation of Adam and Eve is the foundation for marriage: one man and one woman. The fact that they were one flesh is the basis for the oneness of marriage.” No mention of the fact that most Biblical marriage involved polygyny.

Visitors are then directed to a black hallway with no text, no labels, and no lighting. In the middle of the hallway is a plexiglass case with a copy of the Satan snake just in case everyone missed it. This begins the “Corruption” section of the museum. In the next room are examples of earthly misery with no labels or text: still posters of piles of skulls from genocide in Cambodia, a woman in pained childbirth, a tornado laying waste to the countryside, and a heroin user shooting up. On the other wall are projected images of NAZI atrocities, the horrors of war, devastation, and the like.

The next room is another diorama of a couple sacrificing lamb in order to make atonement for sin. After that is a natural scene in stark contrast to the idyllic Eden a few rooms earlier. It shows a “cursed” world. In this room are some of the most interesting labels because they attempt to explain why nature can be harmful or dangerous. One panel labeled “Venom” states the following:

“Though nothing harmed animals before Adam’s sin, venom harms animals in the present. We do not know exactly how venoms first entered the world. Possibilities include:
*Changed use of chemicals (chemicals that once had non-harmful functions at the creation changed to venoms after the Curse).
*Revealed information (the potential to make venoms was built into the original creation, but not revealed until after the Curse).”

Don’t try to reason it out. As stated earlier, reason has no place in the Creation Museum. Visitors are expected to accept the explanations because they do not conflict with the literalist interpretation of the Bible. Moving on, another label titled “Carnivores” explains how, before the Curse, all animals ate plants:

“Though all animals ate plants before Adam’s sin, some are carnivores in this present fallen world. We do not know how meat eating first entered the world. Possibilities include:
*Changed diet (the diet of some animals merely changed)
*Revealed information (the potential for meat eating was placed into the original creation, but not revealed until after the Curse.
By removing the weakest and diseased, carnivores help keep the fallen world functioning despite sin.”

Another long panel justifies the Biblical practice of incest. Truly. The text is too long to type verbatim at the moment, but I’m uploading a picture to the tribe photo album. This panel clearly demonstrates a woeful and willful ignorance of genetics, and it employs entirely self-referential logic, as in most of the rest of the museum.

The next section of the museum deals with “Catastrophe.” The original nucleus of the museum was a model of Noah’s ark assembled by the museum’s chief funder, an Australian named Ken Ham. He made several more models “to scale,” and his design is featured in the section on Noah’s Ark and the Flood. A huge, full-scale section of the ark rises over three stories high, and animatronic figures talk about Noah and his construction. Visitors can walk through the ark section, passing other smaller models showing the various floor of the ark. Several small dioramas, painstakingly assembled in the old AMNH diorama style, show the ark sequence: construction, loading of animals (including dinosaurs), riding the waves, and perched atop Mount Ararat as the floodwaters receded.

After the ark display is a series of rooms filled with panels going into more detail about the catastrophe. Remember, according to this brand of Christian fundamentalism, the earth in its present form is a result of the Flood and its aftermath. One wall uses the eruption of Mt St Helens as an example of how catastrophism shapes the surface of the earth. The reasoning goes something like this: since the eruption buried trees and animals, carved gorges, and deposited meters of sediment in a matter of hours, all buried plants and gorges and sediments across the earth are also the result of a global catastrophe in the Flood. Another panel explains plate tectonics as a result of the flood: before the Flood, the continent of Rodinia dominated the earth’s surface. Rodinia broke up during the Flood and formed Pangaea. Late in the Flood, Pangaea broke up under water and formed the continents as we know them today. The waters receded and exposed the continents. All of this happened in the year of the Flood.

Another equally baffling panel explains how, in the fossil record (interpreted here as evidence of the Flood), plants and animals appear to be arranged in the strata from simplest to most complex. It offers a theory I’ve never heard before: the Floating Forest. Basically, before the flood, there were huge forests floating on the ocean, with their roots tangled in a thick mat. From the label: “4350 years ago, When Flood waves grew large enough, they began ripping apart the floating forest, from the outside edge inward. In a sequence reflecting the forest structure, plants torn off the forest became waterlogged, sank, and were buried on the ocean bottom.” Accompanying these panels is a wall-sized mural of the Floating Forest.

The next section deals with “Confusion.” The various cultures, traditions, and languages of people of the earth are described as a result of the Babel incident. Various cultures are portrayed as exhibiting various levels of corruption, with, of course, fundamentalist Christians being the only ones as having the true account of world and human history.

As for the other “Cs,” there really isn’t much. Christ, Cross, and Consummation are all but absent. I was disappointed that there was no apocalyptic eschatology on display, but I suppose it was a Creation museum after all. Perhaps in the future; construction around the museum is ongoing.

Several friends have asked me whether the Creation Museum is actually a museum, and I maintain that it is, based upon the discussion above. The space is used as a place for the display and dissemination of knowledge; it’s irrelevant whether that knowledge happens to be factual. You might se the same kinds of spurious lines of reasoning in museums built to glorify the state, but that doesn’t make it any less of a museum.

It was interesting to listen to the conversations in the course of the tour. Most visitors, as most other museum goers, simply wandered through the exhibits in a somewhat zombified state. Others were very excited to see “scientific” verification of what they had believed all along. The explanations of the natural world which would have cost any other museum its funding and support were enthusiastically accepted without further question. Several old men leading their families became armchair geologists, explaining the panels to their grandchildren and quoting Scripture.

Much to my surprise, my two friends and I were the only “infiltrators” I was able to recognize. Most everyone else seemed completely accepting of the museum and the message.

I found myself in the novel position of advocating the legitimacy of the museum on a professional level while my every personal inclination railed against it. Like it or not, niche museums (just as niche literature, niche news networks, niche newspapers) have a future, and I believe all stand to benefit by thinking through them.

Within the walls of the Creation Museum, all the conclusions are already set. All that remains is to force observations to fit the conclusions. That's how we end up with things like the floating forest. Information and observations are only valuable insofar as they shore up (or can be tweaked to shore up) the creationist model. Though not mentioned in the Bible, the floating forests don't directly contradict the Bible. Therefore, they are acceptable as a hypothesis.

So what about the Floating Forest Theory? I have a picture of the wall mural; I'll upload it to the tribe album. Interestingly, no notions of the deity making the universe appear ancient to "test the faith" appears in the museum. Rather, they attempt to explain observed phenomena using models like the floating forest and describe all other attempts at explanation as sinful and the result of satanic influence. The museum is full of these kinds of suppositions, and they're presented as facts (or at the very least, likelihoods).

posted in Evolution - 116 replies

Virgin Shark Birth

2007-08-17T02:50:09Z

Obviously, this shark is the son of god.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6681793.stm

Captive shark had 'virgin birth'

Female hammerhead sharks can reproduce without having sex, scientists confirm.

The evidence comes from a shark at Henry Doorly Zoo in Nebraska which gave birth to a pup in 2001 despite having had no contact with a male.

Genetic tests by a team from Belfast, Nebraska and Florida prove conclusively the young animal possessed no paternal DNA, Biology Letters journal reports.

The type of reproduction exhibited had been seen before in bony fish but never in cartilaginous fish such as sharks.

Parthenogenesis, as this type of reproduction is known, occurs when an egg cell is triggered to develop as an embryo without the addition of any genetic material from a male sperm cell.

The puzzle over the hammerhead birth was reported widely in 2001, but it is only with the emergence of new DNA profiling techniques that scientists have now been able to show irrefutably what happened.

The investigation of the birth was conducted by the research team from Queen's University Belfast, Nova Southeastern University in Florida, and Henry Doorly Zoo itself.

The scientists say the discovery raises important issues about shark conservation.

In the wild, these animals have come under extreme pressure through overfishing and many species have experienced sharp declines.

If dwindling shark groups resort to parthenogenesis to reproduce because females have difficulty finding mates, this is likely to weaken populations still further, the researchers warn.

The reason is that asexual reproduction reduces genetic diversity and this makes it harder for organisms to adapt - to changed environmental conditions or the emergence of a new disease, for example.

With normal sex, the mixing of maternal and paternal DNA introduces genetic novelty which can give animals new traits that might be advantageous in their new circumstances.

Sex marks

Dr Paulo Prodohl, a co-author on the Biology Letters paper from Queen's School of Biological Sciences, said: "Vertebrates in general have evolved away from parthenogenesis to boost genetic diversity and enhance evolutionary potential.

"The concern for sharks is that not only could we be reducing their numbers but we could be making them less fit as well."

"Our findings will now have to be taken into consideration for any conservation management strategy, especially for overexploited species."

The birth of the hammerhead (of the bonnethead species, Sphyrna tiburo) at Henry Doorly was as tragic as it was puzzling.

The new pup was soon killed by a stingray before keepers could remove it from its tank.

At the time, some theorised that a male tiger shark kept at the zoo could have been the father - but the institution's three bonnethead females had none of the bite marks that are usually inflicted on their gender during shark sex.

Some even suggested that one of the females could have had sex in the wild and stored the sperm in her body - but the three-year period in captivity made this explanation highly unlikely.

The new tests on the dead pup's tissues now show the newborn's DNA only matched up with one of the females - and there was none of any male origin.

Although extremely rare in vertebrates, parthenogenesis (out of the Greek for "virgin birth") occurs in a number of lower animals. Insects such as bees and ants use it to produce their drones, for example.

posted in Evolution - 40 replies

HIV evolution and Intelligent Design

2007-08-15T06:32:28Z

http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/08/erv_hiv_versus.html

And how and ID claim is used against ID when examined. According to HIV researcher Abbie Smith of the blog ERV.

posted in Evolution - 4 replies

Evo-devo & vertebrae

2007-08-07T00:42:50Z

http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/2007/08/prime_vertebrae.php

Why do mammals generally have a fixed number of vertebrae? Interesting article.

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

The God Delusion

2007-08-03T11:35:12Z

This quote from Dawkins has been really getting me thinking a lot lately.

“The meme for blind faith secures its own perpetuation by the simple unconscious expedient of discouraging rational inquiry”

posted in Evolution - 51 replies

Scientists map elephant evolution

2007-07-27T15:37:47Z

"By comparing the mastodon's genetic make-up with existing genome sequences for modern elephants and the woolly mammoth, they have built up a family tree for the elephants.
The tree has the African elephant diverging from both the Asian elephant and the mammoth about 7.6 million years ago.
Then, at 6.7 million years ago, the Asian elephant and the mammoth also go their separate ways. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6913934.stm

there's no mention of where to find the primary source--I assume it's not yet published.

posted in Evolution - 4 replies

meat, testosterone, and sex

2007-07-23T10:57:37Z

i just started eating meat again after 20 years of being vegetarian, and one effect that i believe occurred was an increase in testosterone. i've felt more aggressive quite noticeably, and it has felt like it was caused by my meat eating. this may simply be that the ingredients in meat amount to more materials with which to make testosterone, or there may be more of an evolutionary story here. it IS more likely, though not necessary, that in the event of dangerous activities, men are commonly viewed as more reproductively expendable than women (i.e. 1 woman + 5 men = 1 baby per year max possible; 5 women + 1 man = 5 babies per year max possible). men engage in more life-threatening activities than women, and well, die a lot more in those ways.

so it is likely that in the event that hunting needs to get done, men will be doing it, though some men won't want to or won't be able to and some women will, and one's fertility or sex ought not to determine the range of options of one's behavior. nevertheless, the trend is real, and was certainly more pronounced in traditional or tribal societies, the likes of which we lived in during the EEA. so, is it possible that the aggressive effects of testosterone are connected by the stimulus of meat adaptively? as in, in the presence of meat and hunting, males who had more testosterone and successfully engaged were more fit in many environments? i don't know, i need help wrapping my head around this!

posted in Evolution - 3 replies

Dinosaurs' slow rise to dominance

2007-07-20T00:04:20Z

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6906603.stm

The dinosaurs might have gone out with a sudden bang, but their rise to dominance was a gradual ascent, not a sudden takeover, a study suggests.

It shows that dinosaurs co-existed with a more primitive group of reptiles for millions of years before becoming the most common land animals on Earth.

posted in Evolution - 0 replies

role of "junk" DNA

2007-07-18T03:54:43Z

i'm stunned that 98.5% of the human genome does not participate in protein-making, and has no discernible function. yes, i like wikipedia's entry on this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junk_DNA but was curious if anyone out there had more to say about the role of this "junk" DNA. i find this to be an intriguing area of research!

posted in Evolution - 17 replies