Cre-Evo headlines takes the published findings of secular sources and points out the futility of their plight, in that evolution does not have that unfortunate necessity we call EVIDENCE!!! Darwinists should be an endangered species on the brink of extinction and I certainly in that case we should allow nature to take its course!
Darwinism = Rhetorical Flubber!
Finch beaks loom large in classical Darwinian theory, but two examples of mouth parts in very different animals show that dramatic variations can be achieved quickly without the slow and gradual accumulation of small changes Darwin envisaged.
A. Pufferfish: The pufferfish that can quickly inflate themselves into spheres have a mouth that is unique among teleost fishes: it looks like a parrot’s beak. A paper in PNAS1 claimed that their unusual dentition most likely arose through a regulatory modification during embryonic development:
B. Madagascar birds: Move over, Darwin finches: the vangas of Madagascar show more diversity than the Galapagos birds Darwin made famous. The seed-eating vangas show wide variation in body size, feeding habit, beak shape and size, and coloration. Science Daily showed a vanga family tree of 22 species inhabiting the island that “differ considerably in terms of morphology and resulting foraging habits.” How did these differences arise? Not the way Darwinians thought, the article surprised readers. “Until now, Madagascan vangas were also viewed to be a textbook example of this process” – the rapid filling of vacant ecological niches.
The new idea is that vangas underwent two bursts of rapid diversification separated by long periods of stasis: the first when the birds arrived, the second when a “key morphological innovation” emerged among some of them much later – a sickle-shaped bill that “enabled the new species to retrieve insects hidden under the bark of trees, and so occupy a new dietary niche.” At first glance, this sounds like two Darwin wins instead of one. The last paragraph, however, casts doubt on what is known in even textbook cases of Darwinian evolution:
Science Daily did not explain how the sickle-shaped beak “emerged,” how the male with the sickle beak found a female with the same innovation to pass it on, how the birds learned to use it and develop a taste for new food, why the prey did not evolve counter-measures, how the beak shape correlated with color changes, or why innovations were so rare as to keep Darwin’s theory in check for millions of years at a time. The original paper also stated, “Why some lineages undergo adaptive radiation is not well-understood, but filling unoccupied ecological space appears to be a common feature.”
C. Hopelessness: PLoS Biology3 shared a paper that underscored how difficult it is to confirm a case of adaptive evolution in an ecological community:
1. Fraser et al, “Replacing the first-generation dentition in pufferfish with a unique beak,” PNAS May 7, 2012, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1119635109 PNAS May 7, 2012.
2. Jønsson et al, “Ecological and evolutionary determinants for the adaptive radiation of the Madagascan vangas,” PNAS April 13, 2012, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1115835109 PNAS April 24, 2012 vol. 109 no. 17 6620–6625.
3. Turcotte MM, Corrin MSC, Johnson MTJ (2012) Adaptive Evolution in Ecological Communities. PLoS Biol 10(5): e1001332. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001332.
Employing exotic unobservable entities such as dark matter may be an escape from scientific rigor in more ways than one.
Recently, the notion that most of the universe is composed of dark matter took an evidential hit. Live Science said, “A sprawling collection of galaxies and star clusters surrounding our own Milky Way is challenging long-standing theories on the existence of dark matter, the mysterious substance thought to pervade the universe.” According to a survey of satellite galaxies of the Milky Way conducted at the University of Bonn, dark matter theories fail to account for the arrangement of matter in a region spanning 10 times our galaxy’s diameter. The astronomers extended the impact of their findings to the entire universe:
Last month Ker Than, reporting for National Geographic News, quoted an astronomer who said the finding of a huge structure of satellite galaxies surrounding the Milky Way puts cosmology “basically in a shambles.” He referred to his other National Geographic article two weeks earlier that also questioned the existence of dark matter because it wasn’t detected where needed to explain the Milky Way’s halo. That finding “could provide ammunition for skeptics who argue that the invisible substance is just an illusion,” he said. About the same time, though, another National Geographic reporter claimed that dark matter particles hit the average human once a minute.
Growing questions about dark matter’s existence may be giving rise to a proverb called the “dark matter argument.” In another context, Maggie McKee at New Scientist reported doubts that the star Fomalhaut has a planet. A bright spot imaged in a dust disk surrounding the star, imaged by the Hubble Telescope in 2004, had been hailed as a direct observation of an extrasolar planet. Astronomers were encouraged at the time by the fact that it appeared in a gap in the dust dusk, suggesting that the planet had cleared a path for itself.
Now, however, a new study from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center has shown that the bright spot might be a dust cloud, not a planet. Furthermore, simulations shown in a computer animation within the article indicate that gaps in dust disks – even with sharp edges – can form without the presence of a planet.
A JPL scientist used the occasion to joke about the escape hatch dark matter theories provide:
These appear to be dark days for dark matter theories.
Some Darwinists cannot give up the dream....