Science and Culture Today | Page 1210 | Discovering Design in Nature

I shouldn’t drink my morning coffee while reading P.Z. Myers. I almost choked. Myers, avant garde of the cult of atheism, commented on Delaware Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell’s observation that the First Amendment contains no phrase “separation of church and state.”
Myers:

Proponents of intelligent design (ID) have long predicted that many of the features of living systems which are said to exhibit “sub-optimal” design will, in time, turn out to have a rationally engineered purpose. This is one of several areas where ID actively encourages a fruitful research agenda, in a manner in which neo-Darwinian evolution does not. One such area, and a field for which I have long held an inquisitive fascination for, is the subject of so-called “junk DNA,” and the non-coding stetches of RNA which are transcribed from them.

Skepticism of the “junk DNA” paradigm is not a phenomenon which is limited to proponents of ID. This popular view of the genome — while still resonating as the conventional view among neo-Darwinian thinkers — has also been challenged by John Mattick of the University of Queensland and Jim Shapiro of the University of Chicago.

Earlier this month, an article appeared in the journal Cell by a Spanish team. The article announced the discovery of the ability of long non-coding RNA, which are often encoded in DNA near genes known to be important to both stem cells and cancer, to serve as enhancer elements (which promote gene expression).

According to the paper’s Abstract:

Recently I observed that the NSF’s $1,990,459 taxpayer-funded Evolution Readiness Project declared on its website that a main concern driving the project is that “it is unacceptable that 150 years after the birth of the theory of evolution only four out of ten Americans believe in it!” Although their website expressly stated that a motivating factor is the low numbers of Americans who “believe in” evolution, the project’s principal investigator, Paul Horwitz, denied that their agenda was to convince people of evolution. As Horwitz told the NABT: “We are not promoting a belief system … Our goal is to help kids understand natural selection as a mechanism for evolution, whether they believe in it or not.” Indeed, the project’s announcement Read More ›

Larry Moran has a post on Royce Murray’s editorial in the journal Analytical Chemistry titled, “Science Blogs and Caveat Emptor.” Murray, a highly respected scientist, bemoans the unedited candor of science bloggers:

In the midst of much confusion among Catholics about evolution, I am very pleased to see an excellent piece by Monsignor Charles Pope on the website of the Archdiocese of Washington DC.

Monsignor Pope has clearly seen the fundamental incompatibility between the standard, Neo-Darwinian theory of biological evolution, and Catholic theology. According to Neo-Darwinism, the adaptive complexity of life is the result of natural selection and random genetic mutations. Given this definition, Monsignor Pope argues that while many aspects of “evolution” may not be problematic, “a simple, uncritical acceptance of evolutionary theory is for a Catholic untenable.”

A major reason that the California Science Center (CSC) ultimately cancelled its contract with the American Freedom Alliance (AFA) to show a pro-intelligent design film was pressure from museums — both nearby and far away — to distance itself from anything associated with intelligent design (ID). My previous post recounted the Smithsonian’s opposition to the CSC’s allowing a pro-ID event. But there was also pressure from much closer to home — from the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLAC), right across the street in Exposition Park. NHMLAC’s involvement began after the NCSE sent an e-mail warning Southern California-area evolutionists about the imminent pro-ID event at CSC. USC marine paleoecologist David Bottjer forwarded the e-mail on to various colleagues, Read More ›

In the previous three posts (see part 1, part 2, and part 3), we’ve seen that the arguments of intelligent design (ID) critics based that the recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) is an “imperfect design” fail for a variety of reasons. These include: To add another reason, pro-ID professor of neurosurgery Michael Egnor has suggested that the RLN may have a medical function which gives the organism a warning that it is sick, and needs to heal from an internal infection or disease originating in the chest area. Dr. Egnor offered me some insightful comments about function of the design of the RLN pathway from his vantage as a doctor and professor of medicine: There is actually a design advantage to Read More ›

It’s finally dropping tomorrow (and you can already order it from Amazon) at the all-star conference of the same name at Biola University, featuring Marvin Olasky, Jonathan Wells, Jay Richards, Denyse O’Leary, John West, David Klinghoffer, Casey Luskin, and more. Display content from www.discovery.org Click here to display content from www.discovery.org. Always display content from www.discovery.org Open content directly Visit the book’s website for more videos, a sample, and free curriculum.

[Editor’s Note: The issue of human exceptionalism — what it means to be human — comes up at ENV on occasion. With this in mind, Heather Zeiger reviews Kazuo Ishiguro’s latest book and movie (spoilers ahead!).]

Earlier this week I discussed the book, Never Let Me Go, by Kazuo Ishiguro. In this post, I will look at the film and focus on some particular aspects that were explicitly brought up in it.

The best part about the film was the three main actors, Carrie Mulligan, Andrew Garfield, and Keira Knightley, who performed their parts well. Also, director Mark Romanek had excellent scenery and cinematography. Admittedly, the film does not live up to the complexity and controlled narrative of the book. There is a line in the book and the film where Miss Lucy says, “You’ve been told and not told,” and when you read the book, the reader is told and not told the nature of the students at Hailsham and their fate. The film, on the other hand, gives it away from the very first lines and then spills everything in one of Miss Lucy’s lectures fairly early in the film. This brings a different dynamic to the film’s story, which seems to do a little more to address the characters’ acceptance of their fate.

The book is complex, and deals with many issues, so, understandably, the screenwriters had to pick and choose which issues to cover. I noticed that the film seemed to be focusing on the medical/scientific franchise more so than a discussion of what it means to be human, while the book seemed to do the opposite. Throughout the book, Ishiguro explores personhood, the human being, dignity, with a smaller emphasis on utilitarian medicine. However, the film seemed to emphasize the results of throwing medical ethics out the window.

Intelligent design (ID) critics Jerry Coyne, Kelly Smith, and Richard Dawkins have all argued that the allegedly circuitous innervations of the larynx from the brain by the recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) is an “imperfect design” that refutes ID. What they rarely disclose, however, is that there are in fact nerves that innervate the larynx directly from the brain through the superior laryngeal nerve (SLN), without taking the longer path of the RLN–exactly as they demand. Thus, the larynx is in fact innervated from both above and below, by both the RLN and the SLN. This is clearly seen in the diagram below, from Elsevier’s Atlas of Regional Anesthesia, 3rd ed., hotlinked from here: As noted here, damage to the SLN Read More ›