Michael J. Behe's Blog, page 540

January 14, 2019

Stephen Meyer: The More Science Advances, the More Science Points to Design

Here. Including a vignette about how Dr. Meyer owned a materialist who lied about Newton’s approach to science.

Copyright © 2019 Uncommon Descent . This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement UNLESS EXPLICIT PERMISSION OTHERWISE HAS BEEN GIVEN. Please contact legal@uncommondescent.com so we can take legal action immediately.
Plugin by Taragana

View more on Michael J. Behe's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on January 14, 2019 20:10

Ancient cataclysms and modern conflicts in origin of life studies

Impact crater/NASA

The main topic of a recent Science article is a claim that life on Earth was jumpstarted by a very early hit by a moon-size object that precipitated a metallic hailstorm. But while sketching that scenario, which wowed a 2018 conference in Atlanta in October, Robert F. Service also recounts some of the more interesting conflicts in origin of life studies:

Arguments have sometimes been heated. At a 2008 meeting on the origin of life in Ventura, California, [biochemist Robert] Shapiro and John Sutherland, a chemist at the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom, wound up shouting at each other. “Bob was very critical about published routes to prebiotic molecules,” Sutherland says. If the chemistry wasn’t ironclad, “he felt it failed.”

Today, [origin of life researcher Steve] Benner says, “The amount of yelling has gone down.” A steady stream of new data has bolstered scenarios for how RNA could have arisen. For example, although Benner and his colleagues had previously shown how ribose may have formed, they could not explain how some of its ingredients—namely, the highly reactive small molecules formaldehyde, glycolaldehyde, and glyceraldehyde—could have survived. Geochemists have long thought that reactions sparked by lightning and ultraviolet (UV) light could have produced such compounds. However, Benner says, “There’s no way to build up a reservoir” of those compounds. They can react with one another, devolving into a tarlike glop.

Benner now has a possible solution, which builds on recent work suggesting early Earth had a wet-dry cycle. Robert F. Service, “How an ancient cataclysm may have jump-started life on Earth” at Science

We expect they’ll be at it a while.

See also: Steve Benner: Origin Of Life Field Beset By Shortage Of Ideas, Science By Overflow Of Consensus

Follow UD News at Twitter!

View more on Michael J. Behe's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on January 14, 2019 14:00

Women’s March falling apart before the anti-Semitism gets to science?

… as in the “March for Science”? A faithful scout sends this:

NBC News and Haaretz report about the disintegration of the movement. I hope that, when the dust settles, the WMI will flourish under new leadership. In view of the debacle, the WMI has done some furious backpedaling, now including Jewish women in the list of oppressed groups for which they march. But it hasn’t worked, for SM&P have a history of antisemitism and support for the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement that is largely populated and propelled by antisemites. Further, the WMI’s attempts to court Jewish women and disavow the organization’s connection with the Nation of Islam have been slow, reluctant, hamhanded and unconvincing.

But now the greatest indignity of all: the Southern Poverty Law Center, an authoritarian Leftist organization that in the past has demonized Maajid Nawaz, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali (Leftists critical of Islam) as “anti-Muslim extremists”—and faces its own accusations of financial shenanigans—has, without much explanation, quietly removed itself as a sponsor of the WMI. Jerry Coyne, “The Southern Poverty Law Center, EMILY’s List, and other groups dissolve ties with Women’s March” at Why Evolution Is True (blog)

Darwinian evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne is the author of a book, also called Why Evolution Is True. He’d started to call out the anti-Semites among the Marching Woke recently. Couldn’t happen soon enough.

Hope they keep fighting among themselves. It’s doubtful the current science bureaucrats would be much use against an organized vilification campaign of any kind just now. And science would go downhill pretty fast.

See also: Maybe The “March For” Fad Will Die Out Before The Anti-Semitism Hits Science

and

Jerry Coyne is learning, but not fast enough (about anti-Semitism among the social justice warriors (SJWs, the marching Woke)

View more on Michael J. Behe's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on January 14, 2019 12:53

Can DNA survival change the meaning of extinction?

Red wolf (4531335218).jpg One pack of wild “canines” carries the DNA of the red wolf, declared extinct in the wild: (the photo is of a red wolf by Laggedon User (CC BY-SA 2.0))

The finding has led wildlife biologists and others to develop a new understanding that the red wolf DNA is remarkably resilient after decades of human hunting, loss of habitat and other factors had led the animal to near decimation.

“Overall, it’s incredibly rare to rediscover animals in a region where they were thought to be extinct and it’s even more exciting to show that a piece of an endangered genome has been preserved in the wild,” said Elizabeth Heppenheimer, a Princeton University biologist involved in the research on the pack found on Galveston Island in Texas. The work of the Princeton team was published in the scientific journal Genes.

The genetic analysis found that the Galveston canines appear to be a hybrid of red wolf and coyote, but Heppenheimer cautions that without additional testing, it’s difficult to label the animal. David Warren, “DNA of wolf declared extinct in wild lives on in Texas pack” at phys.org

Actually, it is widely suspected that the red wolf is, generally, a hybrid of wolf and coyote that appears from time to time and thus can’t go extinct unless one of the two parent groups does.

If breeders chose to work with the hybrid animals, they could doubtless bring a particular red wolf pack back from “extinction” in a way we can’t bring the tyrannosaur back from extinction. But then what are we talking about when we use the term “extinction” in this case?

The whole story points up the problem with the current concept of speciation

See also: Speciation: Red Wolf Not “Endangered”; A Hybrid?

A physicist looks at biology’s problem of “speciation” in humans

and

Extinction (or maybe not): New Scientist offers five “Lazarus species”

Follow UD News at Twitter!

View more on Michael J. Behe's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on January 14, 2019 12:24

Researchers: Termites protect their ecosystem against drought

team collecting invertebrates in ieaf litter/University of Hong Kong

From ScienceDaily:

Termites are highly abundant in tropical ecosystems. They are one of the few living creatures that can break down cellulose found in plant material. They create temporary above-ground protective structures called “sheeting” which allows them to move about in the forest even during drought conditions. They are thought to be important for soil processes including decomposing and soil moisture, however the roles of termites in these processes in tropical rainforest have not been fully quantified using real-world experiments. This is because it is quite difficult to suppress the activity of termites. The research team developed novel suppression techniques using toilet paper rolls and regular monitoring of termite communities to understand what termites are doing in tropical rainforests.

This large-scale experiment was established at the beginning of the 2015 El Nino drought and the team carried out the same experiments in 2016 during non-drought conditions. This allowed them to not only investigate the roles of termites in tropical rainforests, but also how drought influences termite activity and the knock-on effects in the ecosystem. …

They found that the sites with termites saw an increase in the abundance of termites during the drought period, with fewer termites in the non-drought period. The greater number of termites during the drought resulted in higher rates of leaf litter decomposition and nutrient heterogeneity, and increased soil moisture and seedling survival rates compared with the non-drought period.

Joint lead author, Dr Louise Ashton from the University of Hong Kong and Natural History Museum said “Termites confer important ecosystem services, not only in pristine tropical rainforest, but in disturbed or even agricultural ecosystems, if termite abundance is reduced with disturbance, these habitats could be particularly sensitive to drought.” Paper. (paywall) – L. A. Ashton et al. Termites mitigate the effects of drought in tropical rainforest. Science, 2019 DOI: 10.1126/science.aau9565 More.

You’d almost think the system was designed to be stable over a range of climate conditions while slowly changing over time. Termites would be a good tool because they behave as a giant crawling communal brain.

Note: The researchers observe that only 4% of some 3000 termite species are pests.

See also: Biomimetics: Termites Had Complex Gut Reactors 30 Million Years Ago

and

J/;. Scott Turner and the Giant Crawling Brain

Follow UD News at Twitter!

View more on Michael J. Behe's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on January 14, 2019 07:13

Social science hoax papers: Putting a respectable face on persecuting the hoaxers

What’s hot? What’s not?/Niklas Bildhauer, Wikimedia

Portland University is trying to make Peter Boghossian rue the day he quit harassing religious believers and went after the much richer field of nobly rotting social sciences: We are now told that he might lose his job because of “the standards that usually apply in any field where human experiments are involved:

Similarly, the experts Singal contacted said the use of fake data still counts as data fabrication even if the dataset was obviously meant to be part of a satirical hoax. So there may be two grounds on which this IRB could decide to punish Boghossian.

The point Singal is making is that while you can certainly disagree with the way the IRBs are run, and many academics do, they do tend to be run in precisely this way.John Sexton, “More On Portland State University And The Grievance Studies Hoax” at Hot Air

In short, the editors are whinging that they have been made test subjects without their consent because there was a legitimate question whether their judgment is as abysmal as it has tested out to be. And that the intentional hoaxes were “bad data.” And other academics solemnly stand by those standards.

Indeed, academics have recently started to rallying round the grievance studies journals, with the risk of lost grants looming. Faux concern is expressed about the hoaxers’ motivation, as if one needed much motivation for razzing the clown car.

Sexton adds,

This investigation may be warranted but that doesn’t mean it’s not also being partly driven by a desire for some kind of retribution against the people who embarrassed an entire field. Singal suggests it would be best to separate out the question of whether Boghossian should have requested IRB approval from the larger question about the results of the hoax. That’s reasonable but I’m skeptical that anyone on the other side of this particular aisle is interested in doing that. On the contrary, the IRB investigation seems like a convenient way to write-off the results of the survey as flawed. More On Portland State University And The Grievance Studies Hoax” at Hot Air

Okay, when people have no shame, they have no shame. We can live with that once it’s acknowledged. But in that case, why should we expect any benefit to come from public financial support of social science as if it were some kind of science? Social scientists might, of course, be eligible for an arts grant somewhere, for theatre celebrating unique cultures…

Then, essentially, the whole problem disappears. As in, you and I might think that misgendering dogs is a nonsense concept. But so what if someone chooses to make it their lifelong concern—so long as no actual dogs are harmed? And it keeps the academics off the streets and out of harm’s way.

In other words, let’s see the forest for a minute, not just the trees: The very fact that the hoax is generally known as the Grievance Studies hoax and the journals in question are becoming generally known as “Grievance Studies” journals is social rat poison, self-administered. Destroying academics’ careers may feel good but it will not rescue the field’s reputation among thinking people. – O’Leary for News

See also: Embattled “Social Sciences Hoax” Prof Is Not A Hero, He’s A Canary

Social Science Hoaxer’s Job At Risk For Revealing “Bias”

Sokal hoaxes strike social science again

Exposing gender studies as a Sokal hoax

Social Science Hoax Papers Is One Of RealClearScience’s Top Junk Science Stories Of 2018

and

Alan Sokal, Buy Yourself A Latte: “Star Wars” Biology Paper Accepted

Follow UD News at Twitter!

View more on Michael J. Behe's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on January 14, 2019 06:32

January 13, 2019

Some Indian scientists nix Newton and Einstein

The BBC is now reporting on a trend in India to identity politics in science:

The 106th Indian Science Congress, which was inaugurated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, runs from 3-7 January. The head of a southern Indian university cited an old Hindu text as proof that stem cell research was discovered in India thousands of years ago… Another scientist from a university in the southern state of Tamil Nadu told conference attendees that Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein were both wrong and that gravitational waves should be renamed “Narendra Modi Waves”. Dr KJ Krishnan reportedly said Newton failed to “understand gravitational repulsive forces” and Einstein’s theories were “misleading”.Soutik Biswas and others, “India scientists dismiss Einstein theories” at BBC

The Indian Scientific Congress Association has expressed serious concern.

It may be a south Asian version of the sort of thing we face in North America with a current war on math, on science, and on good writing. Here, the thought seems to be that laws, rules of operations, and standards are inherently discriminatory. In India, the thought seems to be that anything worth doing historically must have been done by an Indian first. Neither view makes sense at face value but both can likely be explained politically.

If you think the progressives are not serious, that is your mistake. You may not be vulnerable just now but they are serious.

See also: India: Is An Odd Mix Of Nationalism, Science, And Religion Gaining Ground?

Follow UD News at Twitter!

View more on Michael J. Behe's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on January 13, 2019 15:13

Eric Holloway: Atheists, agnostics more skeptical of evolution now

Eric Holloway was given space at Eidos to talk about the new Blyth Institute journal:

“Wind’s in the east…there’s a mist comin’ in…
like somethin’ is brewin’ and ’bout to begin…”

I recently watched Mary Poppins, and Bert’s line describes the shift I am seeing with science in our culture. A surprising number of the atheists and agnostics I talk to are skeptical about the evolutionary explanation for humankind. It is self evident to them that the human mind is beyond anything in the animal kingdom, and consciousness cannot come about through random physical processes. The skepticism of evolution comes with an even deeper skepticism of modern science, and intellectual authority in general, which can be both healthy and unhealthy.

The upshot of the skepticism is it raises the question: does intellectual anarchy lie in our future, or is there an opportunity for new paths and retracing old paths? In particular, is modern science’s commitment to methodological naturalism a help or a hinderance? Is methodological naturalism actually followed, or is it mostly a slogan? Does methodological naturalism even have a coherent definition?

To address these questions, my friend and I have started a new journal, the Communications of the Blyth Institute, named after Edward Blyth, a contemporary of Darwin whose research demonstrated that natural selection stabilized species instead of changing species. More.

The editors are looking for contributors with expertise in the relevant areas.

See also: The Human Mind from a Computer Science Perspective

Follow UD News at Twitter!

View more on Michael J. Behe's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on January 13, 2019 14:26

Evangelicals waving goodbye to Adam and Eve?

Evangelicals struggle with their embrace of naturalism, ((nature is all there is), often called “materialism,” and don;t seem willing to count the cost:

5. Adam and Eve were real persons in a real past, and the fall was a real event with real and devastating consequences for the entire human race. This is likely to be a sticking point for some. An increasing number of evangelical evolutionary creationists are giving up belief in Adam and Eve as real persons in a real past.

The genetic evidence, at least as we now understand it, makes belief in an original human pair doubtful if not impossible. I suspect in 20 years’ time, support for Adam and Eve as real persons in a real past will be a minority view even within evangelicalism. Should this come to pass, I remain confident that the Christian faith will survive, even though this will require some reconfiguration of our deepest convictions. That being said, I personally don’t find the genetic evidence compelling enough to jettison belief in a real Adam and Eve in a real past. TODD WILSON, “Ten Theses on Creation and Evolution That (Most) Evangelicals Can Support” at Christianity Today

He’s right, and that shift will coincide with many church closings. As we have seen from various news items linked below, there is no definitive reason to “know” that there was no single couple.

It is a sign of significant loss of cultural confidence when people are willing to reconfigure their “deepest convictions” even when the evidence against them isn’t “compelling.” Almost always that’s because what they call their faith is not actually among their deepest convictions.

And they are—you may be sure—a market for someone.

See also: Ann Gauger Talks About Adam And Eve With World Editor Marvin Olasky

Adam a nd Eve reappear in a recent study

and

Adam, Eve, Richard Buggs, And Dennis Venema: Could Adam And Eve Have Existed?

Follow UD News at Twitter!

View more on Michael J. Behe's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on January 13, 2019 10:31

Historian: Darwinists kept the “flat earth” myth going, to attack opponents of their views

You know, “In the Middle Ages, people believed that the Earth was flat and you could fall off the edge.” In Unbelievable: 7 Myths About the History and Future of Science and Religion, Mike Keas writes,

As we have seen, it is absurd to say that educated medieval people typically believed in a flat earth.

And yet the myth endures. Why?

Historian Jeffrey Burton RusselL, the leading flat-earth-myth buster, uncovered the chief motivation behind the proliferation (not the origin) of this tall tale. The myth gained traction in the late nineteenth century, for reasons having little to do with astronomy but much to do with evolution: “The reason for promoting both the specific like about the sphericity of earth and the general lie that religion and science are in natural and eternal conflict in Western society is to defend Darwinism.” Of course, may Darwinians have not perpetuated the flat myth or have been religious in some sense, but Russell’s point stands as a generalization worth recognizing.” (pp. 53–54)

Also:

Keas reminds us that the Middle Ages gave rise to one of the engines of science: universities. They provided a good deal of the impetus for the translation of ancient Greek and Arabic works (often about nature) into Latin.Sarah Chaffee, “n Unbelievable, Mike Keas Highlights Myths and Realities of Anti-Science Persecution” at Evolution News and Science Today:

Troubled is, it all seems so irrelevant in some ways. Universities are degenerating into hives of social climbers, caterwauling because, in a knowledge-based economy, they are expected to listen to opposing views (mediaeval people called that “disputation”) while learning to think. The sciences are no longer exempt. Even Darwinian evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne,/a> no real friend of academic freedom himself, has become concerned about universities refusing to sign the Chicago Statement, the Principles of Free Expression.

A bigger question than why such useless institutions refuse to sign it is why they continue to receive public funding.

See also: Nautilus changes article to credit Suzan Mazur for interview re neo-Darwinism challenges Well, good! We can’t have people like Mazur “disappearing.” If she hadn’t got the story about how basic concepts in evolution are slowly moving away from Darwin 101 as we learn it in school, who would have? Jerry Coyne? But at least both were allowed to say what they did.

And

Embattled “social sciences hoax” prof is not a hero, he’s a canary. Even the fact that Boghossian is an evangelistic atheist banging the drum for “science,” won’t save him from the consequences of exposing ridiculous social sciences.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

View more on Michael J. Behe's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on January 13, 2019 10:05

← Previous 1 2 … 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 … 592 593 Next →

Michael J. Behe's Blog

Michael J. Behe's profile
219 followers

Michael J. Behe isn't a Goodreads Author (yet), but they do have a blog, so here are some recent posts imported from their feed.