"What the----"
Posted on 12/21/2004 4:13:57 PM PST by beavus
The human parathyroid gland, which regulates the level of calcium in the blood, probably evolved from the gills of fish, according to researchers from King's College London.
Writing in the latest edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Professor Anthony Graham and Dr Masataka Okabe suggest that the gills of ancestral marine creatures, which were used to regulate calcium levels, were internalised rather than lost when land-living, four-limbed animals – the tetrapods – evolved.
Many physiological processes such as muscle contraction, blood coagulation and signalling by nerve cells, require specific levels of calcium in the body. In humans, calcium levels are regulated by the parathyroid gland, which secretes parathyroid hormone if the calcium concentration in the blood falls too low. This hormone then causes the release of calcium from bone, and increases its reuptake in the kidney, raising the calcium levels back to normal.
Fish don't have parathyroid glands. Instead they increase their internal calcium concentration by using their gills to take up calcium from the surrounding water.
'As the tetrapod parathyroid gland and the gills of fish both contribute to the regulation of extracellular calcium levels, it is reasonable to suggest that the parathyroid gland evolved from a transformation of the gills when animals made the transition from the aquatic to the terrestrial environment,' said Professor Graham.
'This interpretation would also explain why the parathyroid gland is positioned in the neck. If the gland had emerged from scratch when tetrapods evolved it could, as an endocrine organ, have been placed anywhere in the body and still exert its effect.'
The researchers supported their theory by carrying out experiments that show that the parathyroid glands of mice and chickens and the gills of zebrafish and dogfish contain many similarities.
Both gills and parathyroid gland develop from the same type of tissue in the embryo, called the pharyngeal pouch endoderm; both structures express a gene called Gcm-2, and both need this gene to develop correctly.
Furthermore, the researchers found a gene for parathyroid hormone in fish, and they discovered that this gene is expressed in the gills.
'The parathyroid gland and the gills of fish are related structures and likely share a common evolutionary history,' said Professor Graham. 'Our work will have great resonance to all those people who have seen Haeckels' pictures, which show that we all go through a fish stage in our development. This new research suggests that in fact, our gills are still sitting in our throats – disguised as our parathyroid glands.'
That's word-for-word accurate, as far as it goes; but it's not the complete sentence, and it can be better understood in context. From Darwin's Complete Writings I found it by searching for a phrase from your quote. Here's the whole passage, including what preceded it, with no deletions, and with your excerpt in blue:
But I was very unwilling to give up my belief; — I feel sure of this for I can well remember often and often inventing day-dreams of old letters between distinguished Romans and manuscripts being discovered at Pompeii or elsewhere which confirmed in the most striking manner all that was written in the Gospels. But I found it more and more difficult, with free scope given to my imagination, to invent evidence which would suffice to convince me.But after a few paragraphs, he goes on to say:Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted even for a single second that my conclusion was correct. I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my Father, Brother and almost all my best friends, will be everlastingly punished. And this is a damnable doctrine.
Another source of conviction in the existence of God, connected with the reason and not with the feelings, impresses me as having much more weight. This follows from the extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe, including man with his capacity of looking far backwards and far into futurity, as the result of blind chance or necessity. When thus reflecting I feel compelled to look to a First Cause having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man; and I deserve to be called a Theist. This conclusion was strong in my mind about the time, as far as I can remember, when I wrote the Origin of Species ; and it is since that time that it has very gradually with many fluctuations become weaker. But then arises the doubt — can the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animal, be trusted when it draws such grand conclusions?He goes back and forth. Very difficult to pin him down.
These folks certainly do make their cults, and to some even Christianity itself, look bad with their angry and adamant devotion to utter nonsense.
However, let's hope everyone learns that the merit lies in the messages, not the messengers. Thus Joe the creationist can't undermine the arguments for Christianity, and Darwin can't undermine the arguments for evolution. We should evaluate each point on its own, not its author's, merits.
Definitely not. At least not to the biologist. Still, I cringe when I hear it on TV documentaries because I'm sure there is some young kid out there watching who will get the wrong idea.
Unfortunately, there is no quick and easy way to describe it, so if the description has to be used repeatedly, it will always be the shorthand.
Nice theory.
Pure supposition.
Sure!
We'll evolve into these little guys through 'neoteny'.
Just think of the money you'll save on clothes and hair care products!
nuts
I taught biology at the college level many years ago.
I don't find it fun to try to argue with people that have no understanding of science, who think the chicken and egg saying has anything to do with evolution.
"I don't know a single genuine believer in Christ who accepts evolution."
How do you determine who is a genuine believer? God wants to know. </sarcasm off>
Darwin was not convinced that the Christian dogma of his day was true. Also, Darwin lost a son and was angry at God.
"If sound science appears to contradict the Bible, we may be sure that it is our interpretation of the Bible that is at fault." Christian Observer, 1832, pg. 437
"Christians should look on evolution simply as the method by which God works." Rev. James McCosh, theologian and President of Princeton, 1890
Whenever the church has determined that a certain passage means a certain scientific idea it has run into trouble. If you still believe the Sun revolves around the Earth or
the Earth is flat, then go ahead and believe the peculiar idea that God is so stupid he had to create everything separately and do it in less than 6000 years with some kind of flood intervening destroying everything. Yes, that will get you into Heaven through works of your mind.
If Christian faith revolves around nonsense, it is no wonder that most of Europe has rejected it and it is under attack here.
"The above is a perfect example of how inverted and warped evolutionists arguments have become."
Look who is talking. Why don't you tell us about how the Grand Canyon was formed in the flood, or how God placed all the dino fossils in strata in chronological order to fool us, or how every transitional fossil found isn't a missing link cause once its found its no longer missing.
Then tell us about inverted and warped thinking.
I reject the creation science view of the Bible as a Christian and a scientist. It is not necessary to believe in nonsense to be saved.
Interesting question, and I do recall a journal article that suggested scientists make sure this isn't happening. But I know that for myself it's not, and I suspect that's the case for most others, who have just accepted that the driving forces of evolution have the appearance of being guided, and know they can model them such.
It's similar to people using the Gaia hypothesis for earth, perhaps...they realize that in many ways, feedback mechanisms make the earth behave like a living organism. Few Gaia folks I've known (other than some pagan Druidic types!) actually have believed the earth was "alive," but just used it as a shorthand and conceptual model.
Another thing is that I'm trained as a geologist to look backwards at time, and so it's natural for me to look at the end result and work back. Detective-show fans might like this process, but few others get to think that way in everyday life. And every detective-show fan can tell you that just because there are twists and turns in the process of scientific discovery doesn't mean the actual crime itself has changed. The murder occurred, and we are just discovering the process.
Nah, that's just where I bit my cheek at dinner last night!
What did Christ tell you about the missing vitamin C gene in humans and apes?
With all due respect, go back to message 103 and read s-l-o-w-l-y. It says "to NOT fit".
While I disagree with creationism, there's no way I want anyone's arguments or questions misrepresented. That would do us all a disservice.
BTW, any Christian geologists who are interested in fellowship with others of a similar background might be interested in the Affiliation of Christian Geologists. There are also resources at the site for non-geologists, including an "Ask a Geologist" link.
Not just "missing"...which could more easily be mere coincidence...but mutated exactly the same way. Why would an intelligent and benevolent God put the same mistake into both our genetic codes, making the gene non-functional for us both.
Oh, I think scientists are irrationally sure of themselves - and as close minded as any other humans... and emotionally based like all humans.
best, ampu
I believe that "tail" is called a spine... and to some a backbone.
All, right, lay off already.
So McNealy's an egotist.
I had to work in the Darwin awards with garbage collection, somehow. ;-)
Full Disclosure: Fortran Forever! and vi too!
Hey, they don't call me 'Grey Whiskers' for nothing.
God, The Ultimate (and original) hacker.
And he used open source too. Albeit extremely complex open source.
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.