Watch the pretty squid.
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Watch the pretty squid.
They’re so far ahead, it’s almost April 2nd there right now. And they have taken an important next step: they have passed regulations requiring the reading of disclaimers at church services:
Congregants should be aware of the gaps and/or problems in the Catholic theory of transubstantiation, including, but not limited to, the Protestant notion that the bread and wine are merely symbolic, the opinions of other religions on the life of Christ, and the lack of conclusive scientific evidence available to support this theory.
This is excellent news. I only hope our country can some day follow suit.
The Institute for Creation Research has just published a fairly typical article for them: it’s the usual laundry list of amazing biological structures that cry out “Jaaayzuusss!” to the faithful. In this case, they pick on squid. You see, squid have wonderfully complex specializations to control pigment granules in their skins; these are so lovely and so intricate that — and this is the major leap of ignorance they demand of their readers — they couldn’t possibly have arisen by natural mechanisms, and must have been specially placed there by a loving god. As an extra special bonus, some squid have a symbiotic relationship with luminescent bacteria, so at long last the creationists notice a possible benign function for bacteria.
The reflectins seem to be unique to squid, coded for by at least six genes (specific DNA segments). In addition, researchers have found that the Hawaiian bobtail squid efficiently uses an exclusive bilobed ("two-lobed") light organ to its advantage. A species of bioluminescent bacteria called Vibrio fischera in the light organ receives nourishment from the squid. In return, the bacteria secrete a tracheal cytotoxin designed to control the development of the light organ. This cytotoxin is a small segment of the deleterious bacteria that causes whooping cough in humans. But perhaps the toxin served a more useful function, as we see in the squid, prior to the introduction of sin into God’s creation, which led to the Fall and the current curse under which creation groans (Romans 8:22).
To conclude, not only is biophotonic design evidence for a clearly seen creation (Romans 1:20), but the Hawaiian bobtail squid in particular provides the creation scientist with a possible original benign function for disease-causing bacteria. Truly, God’s creation declares–and reflects–His glory (Psalm 19:1).
Reflectins are proteins that stack in flat plates and efficiently reflect light, and it’s true that they are unique to cephalopods. However, there’s nothing magical about them — other animals have similar structures, they just tend to use crystallized purines. All it takes to make a reflector is a layered tissue that alternates sheets of high and low refractive index, and there are many routes to that kind of functionality.
I love how they had to spell out to their readers that “bilobed” means “two lobed”. They could have just written out “two lobed” in the first place, so all they’ve done there is show that they are pompously bad writers, and that they have a very low opinion of the reading abilities of their audience. It’s perfect.
Bacteria secrete all kinds of interesting stuff; in this case, Vibrio is pumping out a peptidoglycan, a pretty common class of molecules with diverse functions. It is not a sign of intent that similar molecules can regulate cell growth or cause symptoms of disease; rather, it tells us something about the flexibility of proteins and the variety of effects they can have in different contexts. The lesson of Darwin is that unguided natural processes have the ability to generate complex functionality, so it takes more than just showing complexity and function to demonstrate purpose. Creationists don’t understand that at all, so they keep whining “it’s complex!” as if they have brought up an irrefutable argument for design, when they’ve done no such thing.
And finally, isn’t it annoying and doesn’t it expose the ignorance of this creationist writer that he thinks finding bacteria that glow in squid at long last reveals a purpose for disease-causing bacteria? Bacteria thrive because they have abilities that help themselves, not because they’re servants to squid. That same creationist is carrying along a gut full of bacteria, and is covered with a layer of bacteria, and is living in a world aswim with bacteria, all dribbling out molecules that they find useful, and that sometimes do unpleasant things to human beings (and sometimes do useful things, but usually do things that have no direct effect on us) … and this confused, blinkered gomer finds one symbiotic function that biologists have known about for many years and thinks he has an answer? Please.
I wish I could think this article was an April Fool’s joke, too, but I know that creationists babble this kind of nonsense all the time.
You never can tell with Jonah Goldberg — everything he writes tends to be so stupid you’re left thinking that he must be joking. He’s just finished watching that new propaganda movie, Fitna, which portrays some of the worst atrocities of Islam — beheadings and terrorism and rioting and fatwas, etc. — and what does this bring to his feeble mind? Those awful, evil, odious atheists who put Darwin fish on their cars. After all, chopping heads off people is exactly equivalent to putting a bumper sticker on your Volvo.
I find Darwin fish offensive. First, there’s the smugness. The undeniable message: Those Jesus fish people are less evolved, less sophisticated than we Darwin fishers.
The hypocrisy is even more glaring. Darwin fish are often stuck next to bumper stickers promoting tolerance or admonishing random motorists that “hate is not a family value.” But the whole point of the Darwin fish is intolerance; similar mockery of a cherished symbol would rightly be condemned as bigoted if aimed at blacks or women or, yes, Muslims.
As Christopher Caldwell once observed in the Weekly Standard, Darwin fish flout the agreed-on etiquette of identity politics. “Namely: It’s acceptable to assert identity and abhorrent to attack it. A plaque with ‘Shalom’ written inside a Star of David would hardly attract notice; a plaque with ‘Usury’ written inside the same symbol would be an outrage.”
But the most annoying aspect of the Darwin fish is the false bravado it represents. It’s a courageous pose without consequence. Like so much other Christian-baiting in American popular culture, sporting your Darwin fish is a way to speak truth to power on the cheap.
Uh-oh. If Goldberg had his way, I’d be off to Gitmo if he saw the back end of my car. I don’t just have a Darwin fish … I’ve got a T. rex eating a Christian fish.
But basically, his whole argument is ridiculous. Having a statement that proclaims your acceptance of the scientific evidence over the bizarre revelations of an old, data-free book is not bigotry, and it is especially not comparable to religious fanatics murdering people. It is also ironic for a dogmatic conservative like Goldberg to be whining about the “agreed-on etiquette of identity politics” — I’ve never seen that coming from his side of the political fence. I grew up with “America: Love It or Leave It” bumper stickers yammering at me from the back of cars, and now we’ve got “Anti-War=Pro-Terrorism”, and of course Goldberg’s own book, Liberal Fascism. His “agreed-on etiquette” is nothing but a set of rules he applies only to his political opponents and never to his political allies.
So, I’m confused. It’s April Fool’s day. A fool has written a foolish article. Is it real or is it a joke? I sincerely cannot tell.
If Goldberg really wanted to catch us by surprise, he should have written something intelligent.
Start traveling, everyone. The Morris Cafe Scientifique will be held at 6pm, Tuesday, 1 April (that’s tonight) at the Common Cup Coffeehouse on Atlantic Avenue. So come on out and learn about local climate change!
Climate Change in Lake Wobegon: predicting the impact of a warmer world on the forests of West Central Minnesota
Pete Wyckoff, Biology
What will West Central Minnesota look like at the end of the century?
This talk will explore what science tells us about the past response of vegetation in Minnesota to changing climates, and how knowledge of the past may (or may not) provide a useful guide to the future.
Guess what the Top 10 Creationist Discoveries of All Time are? OK, it’s an April Fool’s joke, and the list is actually a fairly common summary of real, widely held opinions that you run into all the time if you engage with creationists, which means the real funny part is in the comments. People are offended by the list.
Even when I was nought but a wee gamete, I was an intrusive little bastard.
It wasn’t just Wilkins’ catalog of the atrocities. It was the sudden realization that if Wilkins can post from one day in the future, there’s no reason Darwin’s influence couldn’t extend back into the past.
The latest edition of Encephalon, the carnival of neuroscience, is using Paris Hilton as a theme, I think because the contrast is so great. It still hurts to read it.
I did find Jennifer Ouellette’s pocket biography of Ramon y Cajal an excellent corrective, at least — balance the photos of a 21st century airhead with the tale of a 19th century genius of neuroanatomy.
Hey, I said that in an interview last spring, which is getting a little wider circulation now: religions are fairy tales. Somebody slapped it on a billboard over Easter, though, and businesses around it reported a two-thirds decline. It sounds like it was very effective at scaring away fools, and that, unfortunately, fools represent a significant fraction of their customer base.
Maybe they should have prayed it away. Or summoned one of their favorite fairies to poof it out of existence.
