News from the internet

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TURTLES GALORE:
Science Daily
(29th October 2012) reported a ”spectacular find” of 1,800 fossilised turtles in North-west China. “It is what paleontologists call a “bone bed” – in this case consisting only of turtle remains.” Fossil turtle specialist Dr Walter Joyce commented, ‘Some of the shells were stacked up on top of one another in the rock.’” The report claimed that the turtles were waiting for rain at a dried-up watering-hole, and some were already dead before a flood of water came along. “When the water arrived, it came with a vengeance: a river of mud, washing the turtles and sediments along with it and dumping them in one place, as the paleontologists read the site and its layers of stone.” COMMENT: Of course, no-one can prove that this is what happened. Has anyone ever seen that many turtles waiting to get a drink? But however they died, their burial was clearly catastrophic and sudden.

THE FLYS’ EYES HAVE IT:
“Fly eyes have the fastest visual responses in the animal kingdom,” reported Science Daily (11th October 2012), “but how they achieve this has long been an enigma. A new study shows that their rapid vision may be a result of their photoreceptors — specialised cells found in the retina — physically contracting in response to light. The mechanical force then generates electrical responses that are sent to the brain much faster than, for example, in our own eyes, where responses are generated using traditional chemical messengers.” Professor Roger Hardie of Cambridge University said: "That a mechanical signal could be an intermediate signal — or 'second messenger' — in an otherwise purely biochemical cascade is a novel concept that extends our understanding of cellular signalling mechanisms to a new level."
COMMENT: No wonder it’s so difficult to swat a fly! Faced with the amazing complexity of the eyes of a fly, will evolutionists still insist that eyes evolved by gradual steps over millions of years? Probably, but it’s not very rational to do so, when human-designed optical devices involve much intelligent input.

WHY NOT “MIRACLES OF CREATION”?
“Miracles of Nature” is the title of a three-part series of documentaries on BBC One, presented by Richard Hammond. At the time of writing there is still one episode to go, but examples to date include the special design which allows giraffes to drink without getting a brain haemorrhage, why woodpeckers don’t beat their brains out, how rain-forest butterflies keep dry, and how bats use sonar to fly in the dark. Hammond explained how nature is “influencing cutting-edge technology” as human engineers copy many of these designs, and claimed, "A lot of the problems we're trying to solve have already been solved — by evolution," which has had “3½ billion years” to perfect it. COMMENT: We have become used to nature programmes which attribute the wonder of creation to nature, and pretend that millions of years of evolution produced them. However, we doubt that Richard Hammond could even begin to explain exactly how, and by what mechanism, “3½ billion years of evolution” could result in designs which intelligent human engineers cannot improve on, but love to copy. With a different commentary, these same programmes could be used to reveal the wonder of God’s handiwork in creation, and give Him the glory He deserves.

WONDERS OF THE WEB:
No, not the “worldwide web”, but the spiders’ web. Science Daily (2nd. October 2012) reports that “While the common house spider may be creepy to some, it has been inspiring researchers to find new and better ways to develop adhesives for human applications such as wound healing and industrial-strength tape.” Researchers at the University of Akron, USA, have discovered that this spider “performs an uncommon feat. It tailors one glue to demonstrate two adhesive strengths: firm and weak. Cobweb spiders use adhesive discs to anchor webs to ceilings, walls and various other surfaces. While they use the same glue on all surfaces, they create it using two different designs to give it a strong or weak grip, depending on whether its prey is flying or crawling on the ground. The researchers who made the finding are already working toward developing a synthetic adhesive that mimics this intelligent design strategy employed by the house spider.” COMMENT: Did you spot the words “intelligent design strategy” in that report? But will the scientists who seek to copy this design recognise who the Designer is?

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

© Paul Abramson, creationism.org

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Free JavaScripts provided
by The JavaScript Source