48

Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 2: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 3: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 4: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 5: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 6: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 7: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 8: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 9: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Fig. 17-13a2, p.269

Page 10: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Page 11: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Fig. 17-13c2, p.269

Page 12: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

The Earth Is Old!Radiometric dating of rocks (amîtsoq gneisses) from

Western Greenland

• Similar results from Australia, Wisconsin, Africa and Russia

Page 13: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 14: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 15: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Archeopteryx

Page 16: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 17: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 18: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Dinosaur phylogeny

Page 19: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Fig. 4. Strict consensus tree of 288 most parsimonious trees (length, 599; consistency index, 0.42; retention index, 0.70) resulting from a phylogenetic analysis of the character matrix of

(26) with NONA 2.0 (29).

G Mayr et al. Science 2005;310:1483-1486

Published by AAAS

Page 20: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

T. Rex protein

“A BLAST alignment and similarity search of the five T. rex peptides from collagen a1t1 as a group against the all-taxa protein database showed 58% sequence identity to chicken, followed by frog (51% identity) and newt (51% identity).”

• Science, 2007

Page 21: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Dinosaur phylogeny

Page 22: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Movie here

Page 23: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Velociraptor

Page 24: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Dinosaur phylogeny

Page 25: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Velociraptor feathers

• Turner, Turner, et alet al Science 2007Science 2007

Page 26: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 27: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Darwinism on defense

by Patrick J. BuchananDecember 19, 2005

Among the most influential men of the 20th century were a pair of 19th-century scholars: Charles Darwin and Karl Marx.

Recent years have not been kind to either. Marxism-Leninism, the ideology that welded together and drove the Soviet empire, has been discredited by the horrors it produced and the colossal failure of Marxist theory when put into practice.

Comes now Darwin's turn. In his 1859 "The Origin of Species" and other works, Darwin posited his thesis that man is not the work of any Creator, but a being that evolved from lower forms of life out of the primordial ooze.

In his "Politically Correct Guide to Science," Tom Bethell, who Tom Wolfe calls "one of our most brilliant essayists," has, in 36 pages, gathered and briefly described a few of the difficulties that Darwinists are facing in defending their dogmas against skeptics.

For generations, scientists have searched for the "missing link" between ape and man. But not only is that link still missing, no links between species have been found. As Bethell writes, bats are the only mammals to have mastered powered flight. But even the earliest bats found in the fossil record have complex wings and built-in sonar. Where are the "half-bats" with no sonar or unworkable wings?

Their absence does not prove – but does suggest – that they do not exist. Is it not time, after 150 years, that the Darwinists started to deliver and ceased to be taken on faith?

Page 28: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

•Nature, February 2008

Primitive Early Eocene bat from Wyoming and the evolution of flight and echolocation

Page 29: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

• You must choose evolution or God– Evolution and belief in God are not

incompatible

– Theistic evolution - An omniscient, omnipotent God could put in motion the events that lead to evolution.

False Dichotomy I

Page 30: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

• You must choose evolution or God– Many Christian and Jewish sects

would disagree

False Dichotomy I

188 Wisconsin Clergy (2004) American Jewish Committee American Jewish CongressAmerican Scientific AffiliationCentral Conference Of American RabbisEpiscopal Bishop Of Atlanta, Pastoral LetterEpiscopal Church, General ConventionEpiscopal Church, General Convention (2006) Lexington Alliance Of Religious LeadersThe Lutheran World FederationNational Council of Jewish Women Center For Theology And The Natural SciencesGeneral Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) (2002)

Roman Catholic Church (1981)Roman Catholic Church (1996) Unitarian Universalist Association (1977)Unitarian Universalist Association (1982)United Church Board For Homeland MinistriesUnited Methodist ChurchUnited Presbyterian Church In The U.S.A. (1982)United Presbyterian Church In The U.S.A. (1983)

http://ncseweb.org/

Page 31: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

What is science ?

• Science is a tool not a belief.• Science is based on the scientific method

– Ask a question about nature.– Propose an explanation based on prior

experience and knowledge for a set of observations about the natural world - a.k.a. a hypothesis

– Make a prediction(s) based upon the hypothesis

– Test the prediction against nature. Attempt to falsify the hypothesis.

Page 32: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

The realm of science

• What questions can science address?– The rules, laws and relationships that

govern the natural world.

• Can not address the:– aesthetic - is it beautiful?– supernatural - i.e., the existence of God– existential - what is our purpose in life?– ethical - Is it right or wrong?

• The supernatural is not science!

Page 33: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

The slippery slope of creationism

• Science seeks to identify rules, laws and relationships that govern the natural world.

• Supernatural intervention is by definition not governed by any natural laws and therefore not testable.

• Appeal to the supernatural is too easy. When a problem appears too hard to solve science can always appeal to the supernatural. This is known as the god of the gaps argument.

• Who decides when science stops (a route of enquiry into a problem) pursuing a naturalistic answer to a problem and declares that supernatural intervention is the answer?

Page 34: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

comic

• Sidney Harris

Page 35: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

What is Evolution?• Variation exists in all populations• Variation is inherited• Some individuals in each generation are more

successful at surviving and reproducing• The genes (inherited variation) of the successful

individuals increase in frequency in subsequent generations.

• Evolution is heritable changes in a population over many generations.

• Descent with modification • Evolution is change in allelic frequency

Page 36: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Mechanisms of Evolution• Natural Selection (Darwinism) - individuals

with favorable variations (traits) better survive and reproduce.

• Genetic Drift• Sexual Selection• Behavioral Selection

• Disproving the mechanism does not disprove evolution.

Page 37: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

• If evolution is wrong then creationism must be right.

– Alternatives to YEC: aliens, Lakota mythology, Hindu mythology, Shinto mythology, any other creation story

– 1st amendment to the U.S. constitution: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

– Other creation stories will be taught in schools!

False Dichotomy II

Page 38: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

• Creation stories would be taught

• Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1, 15-16 (1947): “The ‘establishment of religion’ clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another.”

false dichotomy II

Page 39: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Evolution is just a theory

• As are:– The atomic theory– The heliocentric theory– Cell theory

– Theory ≠ guess

Page 40: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

• A variation on Paley’s teleological argument.

• Aka, the argument from design

Intelligent Design and Irreducible complexityIntelligent Design and Irreducible complexity

Page 41: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

-Wiliam Paley, Natural Theology, 1802

Page 42: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Evolution of the eyeEye-spots - ocelli

Page 43: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 44: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269
Page 45: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Examples of poor design

• Molecular– Humans possess a pathway for

making vitamin C, but one of the enzymes is nonfunctional due to a mutation

• Anatomical– One pathway for air and food.

Leading to the possibility of choking.

Page 46: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Behe’s Irreducible complexity

Page 47: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Bacteria evolve new abilitiesthus increasing genetic information

• 2,4-D is a man-made herbicide.• 2,4-D Didn’t exist even 100 years ago.• 2,4-D is degrade by some bacteria • Bacteria evolved the ability to degrade it.

That is they increased the information pool.

Sucralose utilization by bacteria maybe a newly evolved ability

Page 48: Fig. 17-13a2, p.269 Fig. 17-13b2, p.269

Increase in genetic information

• 2,4-D degradation by microbes• 2,4-D is man-made. Didn’t exist

even 100 years ago.• Microbes evolved the ability to

degrade it. That is they increased the information pool.