YES, EVOLUTION STILL HAS UNANSWERED QUESTIONS; THAT'S HOW SCIENCE IS

WSJ ^ | June 3, 2005 | Sharon Begley

[MRMEAN]

Compared with fields like genetics and neuroscience and cosmology, botany comes up a bit short in the charisma department. But when scientists announced last week that they had figured out how plants grow, one had to take note, not only because of the cleverness required to crack a puzzle that dates to 1885, but because of what it says about controversy and certainty in science -- and about the evolution debate.

In 1885, scientists discovered a plant-growth hormone and called it auxin. Ever since, its mechanism of action had been a black box, with scientists divided into warring camps about precisely how the hormone works. Then last week, in a study in Nature, biologist Mark Estelle of Indiana University, Bloomington, and colleagues reported that auxin links up with a plant protein called TIR1, and together the pair binds to a third protein that silences growth-promoting genes. The auxin acts like a homing beacon for enzymes that munch on the silencer. Result: The enzymes devour the silencer, allowing growth genes to turn on.

Yet biology classes don't mention the Auxin Wars. Again and again, impressionable young people are told that auxin promotes plant growth, when the reality is more complex and there has been raging controversy over how it does so.

Which brings us to evolution. Advocates of teaching creationism (or its twin, intelligent design) have adopted the slogan, "Teach the controversy." That sounds eminently sensible. But it is disingenuous. For as the auxin saga shows, virtually no area of science is free of doubt or debate or gaps in understanding.

[alloysteel]

A question that is "unanswered" has, of course, been posed and has been articulated to some degree. The question that is "unasked", as any trial defense attorney knows, is the denial of a line of inquiry that either the parties involved have a tacit agreement not to open, or that one of the parties wants to keep concealed to avoid this attack on the premises of the argument.

The pages of research and debate abound with "unasked" questions. Authority tends to suppress any sort of inquiry that calls its legitimacy into question, therefore "unasked".

The consequences are sometimes far too grave for popular dissemination.

[RightWingNilla]

about Lucy for instance, she is a chimpanzee, we know that now for sure

A fan of Jack Chick comics I see.

[pending]

Proof that I have read too many of these threads?

---

It is the dreadful post laundry washing and drying sock mystery. Again.
Socks are missing.
Again.
I am distressingly and continually unable to explain these disappearing socks by
any scientific, mathematical or empirical observation.
I count, calculate and measure, sort by color and size,
and am confounded at the consistant result.
The socks are simply, inexplicably
gone.

Some background

I always buy the socks in pairs, this is normal, as they are sold in this formation.
I always wear two of them, normal,as I have two feet.
(Though I was almost run over by an automobile once where I could very well have lost a foot.)
(and sometimes, in this place it becomes colder, necessitating more than one pair, but
rest assured, I account for this!)

The sox routinely go together into the laundry.
Ahah, you say there is the source of the error!

Alerted to this possibility, I devised a foolproof method of assuring that all of the socks enter the closed laundry system, they are placed meticulously each and every time
into a container of The Rubbermaid, with a sealed lid, that assures no escape.
I document the number and color in my everpresent notebook. (Notes are available in pdf format upon request)

What if the socks leave on thier own?
It is true that some which have remained on my feet have developed an ability to stand on thier own.
This fact led me to wonder that they may have evolved from this to actual movement.

I cannot simply assume any power of movement inherent on thier part, there is no
apparent mechanism for movement. Where is the brain? The legs?

Nevertheless, I spent many hours observing a pile of socks in front of me, many hours taking notes. Never a single movement! I filmed them overnight, as they could well be nocturnal, filmed them with my own unaltered Handy cam,then patiently watched the video, used stop motion, slow motion, and zoom.
No Movement! None! (WMV of this exciting phase available upon request).

There was the one time, I include here for accuracy,when the pile exploded into movement in all directions!
But I determined this should not count as proper evidence, as the cause was merely the young kitten of my visiting sister.

Ahah! you say, it is the kitten who removes the socks!
No, I am afraid, this cannot be, as the little one left the home with my departing sister.
And, I have no other pets, nor have seen evidence of other lifeforms who might be removing and hoarding my socks.

I did of course test this possiblity by collecting some healthy ants, and having placed the socks upon them, observed, filmed with handi cam, and took notes. The ants did not move the socks at all!

So today, you, dear reader, can only imagine my dismay at finding,
at sock sorting time,
the odd one here and there
simply gone. Missing.

How can it be?
Each time it seems,some are missing. I count, and count again.

Committed, I have been to Science, so you can imagine my distress. I count and count again...and each time some are missing. A black one here, a gray one there.

Having no explanation, I tore apart the washer and dryer to seek a hiding place.

Alas there is none.
Having no earthly answer to explain this confounding reality
I can only conclude that I cannot conclude where they went,
yet they are gone.
In despair, I cried out Oh God Be Darned, why is this happening!
Why me!

Then,there in a flash of inspiration, the answer!
Accidently from my own lips,
(from a fit of a bit of minor obscenity,for which I apologize...this is a determinedly factual account)

It must be A supernatural, unmeasurable, invisible sock removing intelligence!

From this, it all makes so much sense, and as you might well imagine I am relieved.

Or was for a moment.
A supernatural invisible force with an
unexplained affinity for my socks!

How marvelous, my discovery!

Then, I realised and was made miserable by the thought that, my sox go with this
force,to the heavens or where I can only wonder?

Why not me?

Oh how I wish I never pursued this!
Now it has become my fate to merely sit and wait, dressed up as a large sock.

I can only hope it is fooled by my disguise.

[PetroniusMaximus]

***My rights are guaranteed by the Constitution***

Oh, I guess you don't like the Declaration of Independence...

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. "

[b359]

"witness the latest fakes from China concerning dino to bird artifacts
What makes you think they're fakes?"

Archeoraptor (spelling?) as it was called is a proven fake. The lizard tail fossil was glued to the bird fossil.

[shuckmaster]

there is no proof of Homo Sapiens traits existing beyond 40,000 years (the missing link). How long does it take in your book for a completely new species to breed out of the old? Surely, more than 40,000 years?

Where are you getting this 40,000 years figure from? Modern humans were in Africa at least 170,000 years ago, in Southeast Asia at least 80,000 years ago, in Europe at least 60,000 years ago and there's plenty of both physical and DNA evidence.

[GoLightly]

Spontaneous generation was disproved 100 years ago

Spontaneous generation has not been disproved. All of the strategies the scienctific community has thrown at the question to date have been disproved, but that doesn't disprove spontaneous generation.

[Para-Ord.45]

And one example of what you are speaking of,

"Survival of the fittest" is a tautology. It predicts an undefined winner which can only be identified by the outcome of the competition in which the competitor is engaged.It can only descibe effect ,not outcome.If we used survival of the fittest to predict the outcome of the monte carlo formula 1 grand prix the victor could only be known after the race was run."Things are the way they are because that's the way they are", which is a comparable statement of specificity. We know nothing of their characteristics beforehand, and this is precisely why Darwin's theory fails.

All post hoc propter hoc,inverse reasoning.

It is a valid statement that many freepers fall into the Raynd/darwin athiest category.

Athiesm and secular humanism are religions ( Torcaso v. Watkins).

[PetroniusMaximus]

***If we were endowed by our Creator with certain rights, then why did we have to fight a war against GB in order to get those "rights" for the first time in human history?***

For the saem reason you can't lay on your back and wait for food to fall into your mouth.


***The quote is hyperbole, nice sounding, but essentially meaningless.***

I think you may be on the wrong site...

[Psycho_Bunny]

1. Nothing Exists

2. Granting that something does exist, it's ultimate nature would be infinite and therefore, unintelligible to a finite mind.

3. Granting something to exist, and that it could be understood, it couldn't be explained to another.

-Jainist Conundrum

[PetroniusMaximus]

***Saying that rights are endowed by our Creator does not make it so. ***

You are arguing with your own founding documents.

[shuckmaster]

The mind boggling part is why did human kind only get smart 10,000 years ago?

Now, you've moved the goalposts another 30,000 years...

[b359]

"If only evolution is taught in public school, who is harmed?"

The answer to your question, IMHO, is that science is harmed since the scientific method is not acceptable to the evolutionists. If it was acceptable, then the frauds, lies and problems with the evolution theory would also be discussed.

You do need to distinguish between microevolution and macroevolution though. Macroevolution (we all came from monkeys who came from fish)and microevolution (molecular changes in a single species) are different in context.

Besides, there are many aspects of life that point to a single intelligent designer. So educate on both, allow the student to critically decide.

[shuckmaster]

So, there was a large evolutionary jump and another completely different species was created through a freak birth?

Erectus was an older group, Sapiens was a newer group that moved into their territory. There are two competing theories about what happened next. "Out of Africa" believes sapiens replaced erectus without interbreeding and "multi-regional" believes they assimilated erectus through interbreeding. There's some interesting evidence supporting and contrasting both camps.

[shuckmaster]

Marxist evotheism? You've got to be kidding!

[js1138]

Oh, I guess you don't like the Declaration of Independence...

As I said before, the Christian nations of Europe allowed a millennium to pass without implementing these supposed God-given rights. there is nothing Biblical or Christian about individual liberty. The New Testament explicitly tells slaves that they will be rewarded in heaven for obeying their masters. Even when the masters are unjust. So much for "When in the course of human events..."

[DogBarkTree]

"So, do you believe god took six billion years to create earth including one billion years to create man and then took another billion years to rest? If so, what's he doing now?"
From what I understand, geologist thru radio carbon dating estimate the Earth is only about 4.5 billion years old. The last I heard was that astro physicist think the big bang occurred around 12 to 18 billion years ago. In answer your question,I would never be so presumptuous to try to pretend to know what God is doing at any time. I'll leave that up to smart guys like you to ponder.

[Coyoteman]

radio carbon dating estimate the Earth is only about 4.5 billion years old

Radiocarbon (C14) dating is good back to about 50,000 years ago tops.

[Texas Eagle]

In 1885, scientists discovered a plant-growth hormone and called it auxin.

What did auxin evolve from?

[WildTurkey]

Besides, there are many aspects of life that point to a single intelligent designer.

And many that point to an UNINTELLIGENT designer, or at least to one that has only limited powers.