HA! The 'bias' (it is flat-out jack-boot dogmatism) in all public schools, began decades ago, as I can attest from experiencing high school 'biology class' in 1955 - in two states. I was hit with brainwashing in that direction years prior to that in ALL lower grades.
It's said that the decade from 1936 to 1947 was the scientific highpoint for evolutionist thinking, and I was there from almost the beginning, hearing all the 'evidence' for the reigning paradigm of the 'scientific community.'
The fact is, alternative explanations for all 'evolutionary phenomena' are simply not allowed, particularly if said facts endanger the evolutionary explanation as the only 'scientific' one.
Well, there is honest science, and then there is evolutionary 'science'- the first is nothing at all like the later, which demands allegiance to Father Charlie, 'natural selection' and mandatory vitriolic hatred of any suggestion of intelligent design.
But strict Darwinists are in real trouble with the recent development of Super-resolution microscopy that allows imaging at resolutions of better than 100 nanometers - some down in the 10-20 nm range.
A bacterial flagellum motor is about 60nm in diameter and its tail is 500nm long. ATP synthase is about 10x20 nm. Soon we'll be looking at live complex molecular machines running in real-time 3-D - a sight that will make the phrase 'natural selection' look as silly as the belief in a 'flat earth' during Medieval times.
Speaking of better images, the most recent images from Hubble have become a major problem for astronomers, as photos are another confirmation of the 'lumpiness problem' in cosmology, in which structure appears abruptly as far back as we can see. That is another problem (one of many) for the Big Bang theory.
I'm an 'old fart' (according to some 'lights') and I've studied more scientific literature than most FReepers with degrees have probably seen - and still at work in computer science and a mathematically demanding field (45 yrs) that involves space, satellites - which occasionally brings me into contact with NASA scientists and engineers... several of whom, I'm sure you'll be interested to hear, are in fact what the banned one on this thread referred to as 'YEC's.' I guess he would call me a YECie too. ~grin~
Have a great day, metmom. Methinks many of us are 'sickof libs.' Jim, sick'em - continue to rid this place of needless sickening dross!
Thanks.
Greetings, esteemed elder FReeper.
You seem to have been fortuitously exposed to Science at both ends of the physical size spectrum. How intriguing that must be!
Speaking of intriguing, I decided just on a hunch, to take a look at the "bacterial flagellum motor" from your post (to which I'm responding).
I found this relatively short, considering the complexity of the subject matter, description of both the structure and variations within bacterial flagella, and a plausible conjecture as to how it may have arisen.
The flagellum certainly is complex, even irreducibly complex in this canonical form, but can it evolve? Well, there is still a lot unknown about eubacterial flagella, but we can get some ideas, and a plausible pathway from the literature.Interestingly, the author suggests quite seriously, that the bacterial flagellum motor may be an entirely accidental construct. From his descriptions, I get the impression that bacteria, in their teeming billions, are like sets of tinker-toys, getting assembled time after time with missing and extra parts that make them really, really odd.
And yet, an oddity such as a steering oar could be a useful contraption for a minuscule fluid-dwelling organism.
Apparently authored by Ian Musgrave, the article continues to hypothesize that bacterial flagella came about as a variation of normal secretory structures. I get the picture of Han, Luke, and Princess Leia stuck in the waste-disposal system, trying to assemble a device to assist them.
Evidently, some archaic proto-bacteria got its instructions mixed up and turned its trash into treasure in becoming marginally more motile.
It's also interesting that varieties of bacteria have developed different mechanisms for doing essentially the same thing. One wonders why, if the bacterial flagellum motor is so irreducibly complex, do countless different species use different tools, assembly procedures, and materials to do the same thing?
Here's a link to the short but interesting article. Evolution of the Bacterial Flagella
There is NO alternative to evolution, that is the problem. If they did we could debate it. ID offers no alternative alternative ‘origins’ theory at all(doesnt even try), And Young Earth Creationism sunk with the overloaded Noah’s Ark. (Which is why we have ID now, to avoid that re-debate.) The best ID and creationism could teach is “Things unexplained”
On the other side, evolution needs to be taught with a disclaimer that there is no way to know exactly what happened pre-human recorded history. I admit Atheists love to call evolution a fact, their proof there is no God. And that is a lie.