One of the major complaints about Harvard's "Inner Life of the Cell" video was that it was too serene and uncrowded, creating an "illusion" of design that did not exist. What I have for you below is another award-winning animation which factors for those complaints. It shows the crowded, chaotic, Brownian world of the cell. The process that is illustrated is apoptosis, otherwise known as programmed cell death.

Here's the walk through: You'll see a T lymphocyte approach a diseased cell and the animation will switch to the surface of the diseased cell. Welcome to chaos of the molecular world! You'll then see the lymphocyte present its death ligand to the death receptors of the cell, resulting in trimerization and thus activation. In essence, the self-destruct button has been pushed. Then, you'll switch to the cytoplasmic face of the death receptors which can now attach adaptor proteins, which in turn, fish out procaspase 8. The procaspase 8s become activated and break off to activate other caspase 3s in the cytoplasm "“ the signal is being amplified and spread. The caspase 3s will go about cleaving other cytoplasmic proteins. At this point, you'll switch to a lower magnification to watch the signal spread, causing mitochondria to release their cytochrome c. This protein, which is normally part of the life-giving electron transport chain needed to fuel of the ATP synthase will now moonlight as the a death signal, where it will bind to a protein called Apf1 triggering the formation of the the death wheel, which will then sequentially bind caspase 9s to form the apoptosome, which will activate an army of caspase 3s, reinforcing the signal from the death receptor. The activated caspases will begin the process of orderly taking the cell apart and the cleavage of part of the actin cytoskeleton is shown. Then you switch to a picture of the cell to show the result of the buzzing caspases "“ the cell breaks apart into many small vesicles known as apoptotic bodies. What is not shown is that phagocytotic cells will then simply eat these, providing for the clean removal of diseased or worn out cells.

Are you ready for the show?

Read the rest of this entry »

TT member Nick (not Matzke) outlined his views as a theistic evolutionist. He summarizes as follows:

I'm content with the label "theistic evolutionist," and I believe that:
a) God is the Creator;
b) the history and process by which God created living things is best explained by modern evolutionary biology, rather than "Intelligent Design" in its various incarnations;
c) that process included events that we (correctly) perceive as chance or the results of natural selection, but
d) those events were nevertheless known to God "before" the creation of the Universe, the universe is sustained by God's will, and nothing happens contrary to his will.

I bring this up because this is very close to my own theological views. I would quibble about (b) because I am not convinced modern evolutionary biology and Intelligent Design are mutually exclusive and keep an eye on ID for reasons I have explained before. But perhaps more interesting is point c). From my experience, many theists seem uncomfortable with chance playing a significant role in history. But I think God works through chance. What say you?

Prompted by a TT blog comment and being curious, I looked for a blog entry alleged to show how blogger Chu-Carroll had demonstrated David Berlinski's cluelessness. I came upon Berlinski's Bad Math, a commentary on Berlinski's article On the Origins of Life. I came away disappointed for rather than showing bad math on the part of Berlinski it instead demonstrated Berlinski's failure to hold to faith based outcomes believed to have occurred in a storied prebiotic setting in which putative self-replicating molecules replicated their way to living cells through unknown and unidentified chemical pathways. From the link:

Read the rest of this entry »

If you want, check out the DM Gallery. If you'd like to join the party, e-mail me a pic.

But frankly, I'm worried this one could hurt sales…..

David Berlinski will conduct a tour of the United States in April to promote his newest book The Devil's Delusion. Berlinski is a talented writer, an imposing intellect and not reluctant to buck the tide of prevailing opinion.

Confident assertions by scientists that"¦ they have demonstrated that God does not exist have nothing to do with science, and even less to do with God's existence.- David Berlinski

Attitudes about Intelligent Design are influenced by how we view science and God and whether our view of one affects our attitude toward the other. New Atheists have weighed in with their opinions. Another perspective from a bright analytical mind not committed to theism or Christianity is a refreshing turn of events.

It remains unclear why Billy became a target at age 12; schoolyard anthropology can be so nuanced. Maybe because he was so tall, or wore glasses then, or has a learning disability that affects his reading comprehension. Or maybe some kids were just bored. Or angry.

Whatever the reason, addressing the bullying of Billy has become a second job for his parents: Curt, a senior data analyst, and Penney, the owner of an office-supply company. They have binders of school records and police reports, along with photos documenting the bruises and black eyes. They are well known to school officials, perhaps even too well known, but they make no apologies for being vigilant. They also reject any suggestion that they should move out of the district because of this.

-Here

Although scientists are advised to remain silent for fear of attacks, Professor Tipu Aziz, a consultant neurosurgeon, and Professor John Stein, a neurophysiologist have told the Guardian they believe it is time to stand up to the radicals who have attempted to stop the project.

"I think that it is important to speak out," said Prof Aziz, whose research into Parkinson's disease involves the use of primates.

["¦.]

Work was restarted on the lab in November after a year's delay when the original contractor, Montpelier, pulled out amid threats and intimidation from animal activists.

Today the identity of the new contractor, which operates on South Parks Road behind a five meter (15ft) barrier remains a secret. Builders wear balaclavas and the vehicles involved are all unmarked.

["¦.]

"I feel passionately that animal experiments have benefited mankind enormously and almost all of the medical advances of the last 100 years have happened through animal experiments. People just don't seem to know this, it hasn't been got across."

["¦]

Other researchers will remain silent on Saturday, privately believing Prof Aziz and Prof Stein are taking a huge risk. One, who would not be named, said it was not even sensible to discuss animal testing anywhere publicly in Oxford for fear of being overheard by anti-vivisectionists.

- HERE

Abiogenesis and evolution are different topics. Evolution is supported by a massive amount of evidence and abiogenesis is not. Evolution has many well-established mechanisms while abiogenesis has nothing more than a myriad of speculations supported by slim amounts of circumstantial evidence. Evolution comes with a track record of success; abiogenesis does not. There is a Theory of Evolution; there is no Theory of Abiogenesis. Evolution is a core element of biology; abiogenesis is largely ignored. Since the two are not equally supported or understood, why treat them the same by reacting to a denial of abiogeneis as if it were a denial of evolution?