Posted on 04/01/2006 10:50:28 AM PST by Condorman
Lincoln, NE (AP) - Researchers at the University of Nebraska have, for the first time, confirmed a prediction of the controversial theory known as intelligent design, or ID. The unexpected discovery was made by Paavamanti Ashook and Jessica Aylesworth, two graduate students working under the direction of Dr. Peter Harl, a professor in the Department of Biology at the University of Nebraska, while they were sequencing a section of the genetic code for the turquoise-browed motmot, Eumomota superciliosa, a Central American songbird.
|
During the relatively routine procedure, the research team uncovered a gene in the turquoise-browed motmot that does not appear in any of its nearest relatives. “It came as a complete surprise,” said Aylesworth, “when we showed Dr. Harl he went to the lab and reran the sequence himself.”
“What we found is a gene with no evolutionary precursor,” said Dr. Harl. “There is no homologous gene in any other species of motmot. There's nothing like it in any other kingfisher that we can tell. It looks like someone stuck in an extra gene in the middle of the genome when no one was looking. At this point, the theory of evolution cannot provide a satisfactory answer. ID provides an explanation that works.”
ID is the scientific theory that evolution was guided is some way by an intelligent force, and was the subject of a controversial court ruling in Dover, PA last December in which the school board was forbidden from mandating ID as part of the science curriculum. Although the theory refuses to identify the designer, many adherents claim that the designer is God. According to one interpretation of the theory, some animals will contain certain features without a direct evolutionary pathway, as if the designer inserted or deleted a component of the species independent of the commonly accepted forces of natural selection.
“We will need to do more research,” Ashook said, “In the meantime, this definitely causes problems for evolution. But as a scientist I have to choice but to follow the evidence.”
The team’s results will be published in the next issue of the journal The Natural World.
And from the University of Nebraska. Man, that's funny.
It's an April Fools joke.
Thanks for the link. Beautiful bird.
And using AP as his source which is a source I always trust....
LOL :-)
Passed out and hung over again?
Each should worship in their own way. I believe there are many stories about how different cultures have chosen to worship the ID'er.
Do you realize how much new grant money this will generate PH?
Think of it, the signature of the designer right in this DNA. There should be some incredible new discoveries based on this.
But 'where' is the question. You might want to try the other door; I hear that they're taking cases like yours - No questions asked! :o)
What's a laugh here is that they act like it's the first time.
Motmot is a kingfisher.
Interesting. But hardly "proof".
"Interesting. But hardly "proof"."
This gene didn't *poof* out of thin air. It had to have been designed.
No-kin-to-monkeys is brought to mind except that he was not trotted out on April fools day.
OK, I get it, Designer Genes!
" OK, I get it, Designer Genes!"
Heathen.
I knew this would happen for one day!
OK. Here we go again.
"You want PROOF of evolution? PROOF? HUH? What is 'proof'? Let's not argue semantics here, OK? Proof is just a word. Proof doesn't mean a thing. We can't know for certain that '2+2=4' when we balance our checkbooks. If I write a program in 'C' I can say '2+2=bananas'. PROOF! HAHAHAHAHAHA. (scoff) Proof is for radical extremists who don't believe in science ..."
blah blah blah blah blah
""You want PROOF of evolution? PROOF? HUH? What is 'proof'? Let's not argue semantics here, OK? Proof is just a word. Proof doesn't mean a thing."
Proof is real. But not in science.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.