It's astounding to me that they insist on linking this to a function of natural selection. This is one of the biggest reaches yet. How else did the bird sense that there was a magnetic field to follow in order to even conceive of the idea of manufacturing a means of following it? If that weren't so impossibly difficult for non-intelligent organic matter to come up with on its own! It's mind boggling. Truly, God is glorified in His creation!
http://news.illinois.edu/news/09/0622birds.html
Toxic Molecule May Help Birds "See" North and South
CHAMPAIGN, lll. � Researchers at the University of Illinois report that a toxic molecule known to damage cells and cause disease may also play a pivotal role in bird migration. The molecule, superoxide, is proposed as a key player in the mysterious process that allows birds to �see� Earth�s magnetic field.
Changes in the electromagnetic field, such as those experienced by a bird changing direction in flight, appear to alter a biochemical compass in the eye, allowing the bird to see how its direction corresponds to north or south.
The discovery, reported this month in Biophysical Journal, occurred as a result of a �mistake� made by a collaborator, said principal investigator Klaus Schulten, who holds the Swanlund Chair in Physics at Illinois and directs the theoretical and computational biophysics group at the Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology. His postdoctoral collaborator, Ilia Solov�yov, of the Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies, did not know that superoxide was toxic, seeing it instead as an ideal reaction partner in a biochemical process involving the protein cryptochrome in a bird�s eye.
Cryptochrome is a blue-light photoreceptor found in plants and in the eyes of birds and other animals. Schulten was the first to propose (in 2000) that this protein was a key component of birds� geomagnetic sense, a proposal that was later corroborated by experimental evidence. He made this prediction after he and his colleagues discovered that magnetic fields can influence chemical reactions if the reactions occur quickly enough to be governed by pure quantum mechanics.
�Prior to our work, it was thought that this was impossible because magnetic fields interact so weakly with molecules,� he said. Such chemical reactions involve electron transfers, Schulten said, �which result in freely tumbling spins of electrons. These spins behave like an axial compass.�
Changes in the electromagnetic field, such as those experienced by a bird changing direction in flight, appear to alter this biochemical compass in the eye, allowing the bird to see how its direction corresponds to north or south.
�Other researchers had found that cryptochrome, acting through its own molecular spins, recruits a reaction partner that operates at so-called zero spin. They suggested that molecular oxygen is that partner,� Schulten said. �We propose that the reaction partner is not the benign oxygen molecule that we all breathe, but its close cousin, superoxide, a negatively charged oxygen molecule.�
When Solov�yov showed that superoxide would work well as a reaction partner, Schulten was at first dismissive.
�But then I realized that the toxicity of superoxide was actually crucial to its role,� he said. The body has many mechanisms for reducing concentrations of superoxide to prevent its damaging effects, Schulten said. But this gives an advantage, since the molecule must be present at low concentrations � but not too low � �to make the biochemical compass work effectively,� he said.
Although known primarily as an agent of aging and cellular damage, superoxide recently has been recognized for its role in cellular signaling.
However, its toxicity may also explain why humans do not have the same ability to see Earth�s electromagnetic field, Schulten said.
�Our bodies try to play it safe,� he said. �It might be that human evolution chose longevity over orientational ability.�
Haha, if they first wouldn't make the wrong conclusion to begin with, maybe they wouldn't be so confused when they stumbled upon something like this, lol. Only another testament to a divine creation.
I always get the sense that the agenda is to prove there's no creator when these discoveries are made. It would take more faith for me to believe that nothing + nothing = everything, than the faith I have in God. I mean the error in that logic should be slapping you in the face silly. Reminds me of 2 Timothy 3:7 "....always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth"
When do we as "believers," come to the realization, that faith in God is not the case of our "affirming that the word of God is true, by virtue of scientific analysis"; but of the word of God empirically establishing that what exists throughout the heavens and the earth, was created by God. Of course, the creation demonstrates the aspects of Intelligent design; but make no mistake about it, design is not all there is to it. The creation was not designed as in an automobile, with the designer giving up responsibility for the maintenance and upkeep; it was designed by "The Designer," Who must also sustain it, hence, it is "The Creation," and not "a creation." It is being created right now, because God is in it, and must be continuously!
Your heart is not a nuclear reactor; each heartbeat must be sustained or else you die! Hence, "A TIME TO BE BORN, AND A TIME TO DIE!" [Ecclesiastes 3:1-8]
Respect your Creator; for He has the power, and right, as THE DESIGNER," to take your breath away in a New York Second!
"THROUGH FAITH WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE WORLDS WERE FRAMED BY THE WORD OF GOD, SO THAT THINGS WHICH ARE SEEN WERE NOT MADE OF THINGS WHICH DO APPEAR!" [Hebrews 11;3]
You would think that such intelligent minds would ask the obvious question "How is it possible for NEW INFORMATION to be gleamed from information being lost in a code?".
A mutation (which is how they claim new genes are created) means that information is lost thereby altering the code, so that the decodation (my word) spells something different -- which supposedly creates something different.
ALL mutations create disfigured things and are not functional. The few that do help in some way (like Sickle Cell Anemia which shields you from malaria but eventually kills from being anemic) are malignant in another way.
Interesting thread! Not sure of the specific verse numbers, but the bible says the knowledge and wisdom of man and the fallen world comes from below, not from God.
God doesn't operate like we do however, and we have many secular humanist (anthropomorphic existentialist) scientists who desire to prove Evol. true, because they hate the truth and the idea of an absolute moral lawgiver like God.
Would anyone say it is a conditioned mind that requires proof to believe? That perhaps only a 'programmed' or 'subverted' mind *demands* proof? Most people out there do not see the results in labs, but are left to read: "Scientists have discovered..." and then blind faith takes over from there. A walk with God in life and faith in Him, a relationship with the Lord starts out almost the same way; blind faith. Before knowing who Jesus is, my mind only could question how something invisible could be real, once my faith grew in Him.. the evidence was overwhelming and abundant!
Something that seems to go unnoticed by the secular scientific community;
What we have today in secular schools is working theory and working fact. A fact is not called "truth", however simply because relativism theory affirms that there is no real truth out there in the world, and if there is - it's all relative anyway and in no way absolute like God's word. It's just the fallen worlds defense mechanism to steal glory from Him.
Mistruth theory fact truth
Consider the following statement; "All truth is relative." Even Einstein was on the right right track when he stated relativism should apply only to physics and not ethics. Have you ever noticed how something you learned in science class when you were young has completely changed ? (evolved!) Isn't it strange why any medicines out there, or practices can only ever be 99.9% effective or true?
My question is this: Between cognitive relativism and moral relativism (the latter teaches there is no real right or wrong out there, just situations pertinent to a specific culture!) how can *anyone* make the statement: "All truth is relative." ?!?
How can one claim truth in stating that there is no truth at all?? That's how messed up the fallen world is, and the only real evidence of Evol. (evolution, which is the antithesis of Love) is in the secular scientific realm which has to correct and update itself to maintain the theory of evolution and keep it from falling apart. The way I see it, it is much like watching a rabbit with a stick taped to its head. At the end of the stick, a carrot dangles from a string attached to the stick. The rabbit can run, run, and run some more... but will never get the carrot. The carrot represents truth, and being that secular science says truth does not exist, what exactly are they feeding to the masses then? Up to 99.9% working fact! Many years ago I spoke with a licensed physician about truth.. his reply was simply "if there is truth out there, we're never going to find it." Either he was not very optimistic, or his mind was closed to the notion that God is very real, and that truth does have a bodyguard of lies.
It actually requires far more blind faith to be an atheist than it does to believe in God, as little children would. Evolution is no more than a fairy tale for adults who cannot handle truth, in the same likeness that if a princess kisses a frog it *poof* becomes a prince which is a fairy tale for children.
Sorry, but no matter how long or the conditions.. a bog of primordial sludge is never going to produce an astronaut. Intelligent design implicates an intelligent designer. We can use the theories and facts of the fallen world against it to defend God's word, but you can also pull the rug out from under the competition by realizing that a fact will never be truth as truth doesn't exist in the secular scientists mind and never will, courtesy and compliments of relativity theory.
The pocketwatch argument compliments another post in this thread; to offer another view on how evolution can never be true try the following experiment: Grab a small handkerchief and a small handful of items.. paperclip, pebbles, anything really. Put all of the items into the handkerchief and secure it neatly.. next, toss the handkerchief up into the air. Toss it up again, and keep tossing it up until when you open it, there is a fully functioning pocketwatch in it (or anything else remotely close to the intricacy of the human body or this earth we inhabit.) That's how little chance plays in the grand scheme of things.. it doesn't have a chance at explaining intelligent design yet still tries.
This article is really evidence that we humans try to reach where God is and never can. The Bible says, that eyes have not seen, nor ears heard, nor has it entered into the hearts of man, what God has gone to do for us, what He has done for us and what He is still capable of doing for us. God only allows us to see and experience only a glimpse of His awesomeness and magnificence when He lets us stumble upon these bits and pieces of scientific information. But it's really ironic that we only find out these bits of information by stumbling upon them. Do you realize that God hardly lets us find scientific information using exact deductions and precise calculations? I guess if He allowed that to happen, then we humans would think that it's all our doing. Ha! Amazing how God works. Science and life both show and testify to us that there is a Creator and that He still lives - otherwise, how would the whole creation sustain itself - especially after all the damage we humans have inflicted upon it? Wonderful stuff. Made me think a bit.
