How did bats evolve the ability to fly? Evolution helped them out by providing them with higher energy. After all, “Flight is among the most energy-consuming activities” in the animal kingdom, said a team of Chinese and Canadian scientists reporting in PNAS,1 so it’s obvious that evolution must have provided the genes to get the job done. So they looked at the genes of bats compared to other mammals, and sure enough, they found evidence of natural selection at work. “Both mitochondrial and nuclear-encoded OXPHOS [oxidative phosphorylation, a process of metabolism] genes display evidence of adaptive evolution along the common ancestral branch of bats, supporting our hypothesis that genes involved in energy metabolism were targets of natural selection and allowed adaptation to the huge change in energy demand that were required during the origin of flight.” The team looked into the mitochondrial genes and nuclear genes of the two bats whose draft genomes have been published, and compared the genes for metabolism with several other mammals. They came up with statistics that indicated a 25% signature of “positive selection” in the mitochondrial genes and close to 5% for the nuclear genes (they claimed that “Positive selection and gene duplication are two major mechanisms of adaptive evolution”). They acknowledged, though, that identifying positive selection is tricky business:2 Typically, positive selection will act on only a few sites and for a short period of evolutionary time; thus the signal for positive selection usually is swamped by the continuous negative selection that occurs on most sites in a gene sequence. Even after a short period of positive selection, this is commonly followed by a long period of purifying selection, which would obscure the selective processes. These processes explain why it has been so difficult to detect positive selection in mtDNA, despite extensive studies.Nevertheless, they defended several independent tests, such as branch-site models, to try to weed out and distinguish other signals, and thus support their identification of positive selection. Now surely, they must realize there has to be more to it than that, right? Well, but of course. Their paper ends with this paragraph:Bats are unique in being the only mammals capable of powered flapping flight. As in birds, bat flight is a highly energetically expensive form of locomotion. However, it is also a very efficient mode of transport and assists flyers in feeding and breeding as well as avoidance of predators. The evolution of flight in bats was a major factor leading to the success of this amazing group of mammals, although the evolution of this ability has required complex changes in the anatomy of these animals. In addition to other important factors, such as changes in bone density and development of the wings, bat flight also requires a significantly higher metabolic rate, a rate well above the maximum capable by other similar-sized terrestrial mammals during exercise. Aerobic metabolism by mitochondria plays a vital role as the energy production centers of cells The OXPHOS pathway of mitochondria has adaptively evolved to meet the demands of changing environmental and physiological conditions. Because the mitochondrial respiratory chain has a dual genetic foundation (mitochondria and nuclear genomes), here we examined both genomes to obtain insights into the evolution of flight by mammals. Both mitochondrial genes and nuclear-encoded OXPHOS genes showed greater evidence for adaptive evolution; this result supports our hypothesis that energy metabolism genes were targets of natural selection that included a balancing cytonuclear coevolutionary constraint, which allowed adaptive changes in energy demands and thus played a crucial role in attainment of flight by bats.1. Yong-Yi Shen, Lu Liang, Zhou-Hai Zhu, Wei-Ping Zhou, David M. Irwin, and Ya-Ping Zhang, “Adaptive evolution of energy metabolism genes and the origin of flight in bats,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published online before print April 26, 2010, doi: 10.1073/pnas.0912613107.2. For more on the pitfalls of measuring positive selection, or tying it to adaptive fitness, see 09/05/2008, 01/13/2010 bullet 6, and 02/17/2010 bullet 4.We will have to call this the Mighty Mouse theory of bat evolution. It’s about as credible as the character who always managed to fly in for the rescue at the last moment (Wikipedia), and about as cartoony, too. Papers like this are another reason we really, really need to end the one-party rule in science. The Darwin Party is so corrupt, its members have convinced themselves that this kind of research constitutes evidence for evolution. Undoubtedly, the leaders of the regime will stack this paper on top of their growing pile of propaganda to intimidate doubters by showing them the mounds of scientific evidence supporting Darwin’s theory. But this paper makes no sense at all unless one already is a member of the Darwin Party, has pledged allegiance to Darwin, and already vowed to interpret everything in the light of common descent by random mutations and natural selection. Then the reasoning is deductive: since we already know as axiomatic truth that bats evolved from rodents, then “this result supports our hypothesis that energy metabolism genes were targets of natural selection that included a balancing cytonuclear coevolutionary constraint, which allowed adaptive changes in energy demands and thus played a crucial role in attainment of flight by bats.” The fogma is so thick they can’t see it. Only those outside of it can see what is going on. Simply put, adding energy to a mouse will not make it fly. Adding piecemeal goals to a Darwinian story will not make Darwinian theory fly, either. Darwinians need to think consistently with their theory. They cannot look in retrospect and say, Because bat flight evolved, this or that modification must have contributed to the overall complex trait. Bat flight is a package deal. As fossils have shown, bats appear abruptly in the record fully capable of flight and probably capable of sonar. More importantly, there is no “target of selection” in terms of an overall complex trait. Think of a cow. What will it take to help Bessie evolve flight? Well, a high metabolism will surely be among the requirements. So let’s say that Tinker Bell comes along with her mutation wand and starts zapping poor Bessie in the gonads. Among the calves that don’t die as embryos, maybe there will be one some day that survives with a slightly higher metabolic rate. Are we getting warmer? Are we on the way to evolving flight in Bessie’s descendents? It’s not necessary to press the point to see how absurd this tale is already, and we haven’t even tried to talk Bessie into the advantages of how nice it will be for her descendents with wings some golden day, millions of years from now, to be able to efficiently escape their human predators that are trying to hunt them down for hamburger. (Don’t tell her that the human predators by then will have co-evolved into fearsome fighters flying at Mach 2.) Darwin’s theory demands that every beneficial mutation confer survival advantage right now, not millions of years in the future. It has no goals, no targets, no visions, no plans. A mouse in its hole has no desire to sprout wings and become a bat, no matter how nice it might be for feeding, breeding, and avoidance of predators. Once again, we see how the Darwin supernaturalists conceal their miracles with misdirection and euphemisms. Everyone believes in miracles, you realize; and everyone is a supernaturalist. Darwinists only pretend to be naturalists. Their slip is showing every time they use logic and reason, which are not made of particles and forces. Look for the miracle-talk in this sentence: “The evolution of flight in bats was a major factor leading to the success of this amazing group of mammals, although the evolution of this ability has required complex changes in the anatomy of these animals.” OK, students, barrage the teacher with your questions. But teacher, how did this evolution occur? How can a Darwinian process be factored? – that sounds like algebra, a form of intelligent design. What do you mean by success – survival? The mice seemed to be pretty successful, because they still survive today and are more numerous than bats. How did the complex changes in the anatomy of bats occur simultaneously with the metabolic changes? How were they coordinated and tuned? You talked about changes in bone density and “the development of wings” – Wow! Isn’t that a giant leap for batkind? Didn’t Darwin say that nature takes no giant leaps, but only slight, successive modifications? What were the modifications, and how did they confer survival value? What do you mean by a “target” of natural selection? That sounds like anthropomorphism. Who will ask these and other questions, if not creationists, the intelligent design movement, or at least critics of neo-Darwinism? Scientists need critics to keep them in line. When it comes to Darwinism, though, the whole regime is corrupt. Don’t look for critical thinking from the NAS, the NIH, NASA, the NSF, or the major secular journals. The news media aren’t holding them accountable, either (02/18/2010), except for independent sources like CEH. Many individual scientists have their heads on straight but those who try to buck the establishment risk marginalization or expulsion. Totalitarian regimes typically become so corrupt that they become caricatures of themselves – fodder for political cartoons. That is certainly the case with the Darwin Party today. The rank and file largely ignore the ideology. They go along with it and repeat the party line on cue to stay out of trouble. No one dares speak out against it, even though an elementary course in baloney detecting could expose its nonsensical fables. The folly of theory-incestuous papers like this one shows that a thorough housecleaning is long overdue. Open the castle doors, DODO* bigots, and answer the challenge! Your mental health depends on lively and open debate. Listen to your founder: “A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question” – Charles Darwin.(Visited 65 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest Rural business development in Ohio and West Virginia is getting a boost thanks to a $200,000 grant presented to the Ohio Cooperative Development Center, housed at The Ohio State University South Centers in Piketon.The funding is one of 29 grants awarded Oct. 3 by the U.S. Department of Agriculture through its Rural Cooperative Development Grant program. The federal agency awards a total of $5.8 million to help rural cooperatives create jobs and support business expansion, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a written statement.“America’s rural communities have incredible potential to create jobs and expand economic opportunities,” Vilsack said in the statement. “Many rural businesses and organizations are succeeding under the cooperative business model, and with access to additional resources, they can boost job creation and create an environment where more products are made in rural America.”The grant will be used to help businesses and individuals in rural Ohio and West Virginia explore cooperative opportunities in several industries, including energy and wood products, according to Sam Rikkers, administrator of USDA’s Rural Business-Cooperative Service, who announced the grant awardees during a visit to the centers in Piketon.The grant will provide the opportunity for groups exploring cooperatives and for emerging cooperatives to access one-on-one technical assistance throughout their development process, said Hannah Scott, program manager of the Ohio Cooperative Development Center.The center is part of Ohio State University Extension’s work to increase economic productivity and job and business development in the region. OSU Extension is the outreach arm of the College of Food, Agricultural, and Environmental Sciences at The Ohio State University.“The center’s mission revolves around rural economic development,” Scott said. “We provide assistance to businesses in order for them to become drivers of economic growth in their communities.“We’re appreciative of USDA’s support of this work this year and throughout our history. OCDC has been working in Ohio since 2000 and has recently expanded to offer services in West Virginia.”As a result of the funding, the development center will provide a seed grant program to develop and expand cooperatives, she said, with a goal to assist 20 businesses and eight startups.The grant will provide a beneficial boost to the region, Scott said.According to the Appalachian Regional Commission, residents in Appalachian Ohio and West Virginia experienced 8.9 and 7.2% unemployment, respectively, from 2011 through 2013, with a per-capita income in 2013 of $24,855 and $26,020 and a three-year poverty rate of 17.6 and 17.9%, respectively.During the past five years, the center has provided more than 2,900 hours of technical assistance and has assisted with the formation of 35 cooperatives and other business entities in a variety of industries, Scott said.That has resulted in an estimated 194 new jobs and 229 retained jobs. It has also resulted in the investment of $72,000 in seed grants, she said.Examples of work that the USDA grant can fund include conducting feasibility studies, developing business plans, providing leadership and operational improvement training, and facilitating strategic planning for individuals and businesses in rural areas, Scott said.For more information on the Ohio Cooperative Development Center and its programs, contact Scott at 740-289-2071, ext. 227, or firstname.lastname@example.org.
By Molly Herndon & Bari SobelsonManaging finances while raising a family is difficult enough. Families facing the stress that comes with separation, divorce, or deployment can become overwhelmed by the accompanying financial changes of these circumstances.The Personal Finance and Family Development teams will host a 3-part webinar series on Family Finances. Each of these webinars will tackle the financial and emotional hurdles presented by changes in family structure.Family Finances Webinar SeriesJuly 10, 11 a.m.-12:30 p.m. ET: Separation and Single Parenting in the Military with Dr. Kacy Mixon & Dr. Martie Gillen. For many service members with families and children, it can be a difficult balance between responsibilities to their families and to the military. Separation and single parenting can make this balance even more difficult, leaving service members and their family members shouldering even more responsibilities than before. During this 90-minute webinar, Dr. Mixon and Dr. Gillen will discuss both the emotional and financial impacts of separation and single parenting in the military.Dr. Kacy MixonKacy Mixon, Ph.D., LMFT-is the Project Director for the Family Development Team of the Military Families Learning Network. She is also an Assistant Professor in the Psychology, Counseling & Family TherapyDepartment at Valdosta State University. As a licensed marriage and family therapist (AAMFT clinical fellow), Kacy has worked with families from all walks of life. Her trainings, presentations and courses, however, focus primarily on family violence, trauma, military families, and foster-care transitions.Dr. Martie GillenMartie Gillen, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor and Extension Specialist for the Department of Family, Youth, and Community Sciences, in the Institute for Food and Agricultural at the University of Florida. She joined the Department in June, 2011. Her appointment is 65% teaching, 10% research, and 25% Extension. She has a BA in Business Administration from Morehead State University and a MBA from Sullivan University. She earned her Doctorate in Family Studies from the University of Kentucky. She also earned a Graduate Certificate in Gerontology and a Graduate Certificate in Applied Statistics from the University of Kentucky.August 28, 11 a.m.-12:30 p.m.ET: Financial Planning for Life Events with Dr. Barbara O’Neill.Dr. Barbara O’NeillIn this webinar, Dr. O’Neill will talk about preparing for the inevitable circumstances that life throws our way. Divorce, untimely death, health crises, marriage, remarriage, widowhood, home-buying and retirement take a tremendous toll on finances. This webinar will talk about savings and insurance as protective barriers against the financial distress these events can cause. She will also discuss recovery plans to regain lost finances and starting again on a reduced income. Barbara O’Neill, Ph.D is a Financial Resource Management Specialist for Rutgers Cooperative Extension, has been a professor, financial educator, and author for 35 years. She has written over 1,500 consumer newspaper articles and over 125 articles for academic journals, conference proceedings, and other professional publications.November 13, 11 a.m.-12:30 p.m. ET: Raising Financially Responsible Children with Neale Godfrey.Neale GodfreyNeale Godfrey will deliver a 90-minute webinar discussing the importance of raising financially responsible children. This interactive learning opportunity will include quizzes for parents and children to determine their financial management style and offer guidance for teaching financial responsibility to children. Neale Godfrey is an author. Her books deal with money, life skills, and value issues. One of them, Money Doesn’t Grow on Trees: A Parent’s Guide to Raising Financially Responsible Children,was a New York Times #1 Best Seller. She is currently Executive in Residence at the Columbia Graduate School of Business and is a weekly contributor at Forbes.com, averaging 100,000 page views per week. She also hosts regular discussions on her web platform, NealeGodfrey.com.Save the dates and join us for this 3-part interactive and comprehensive look at the changes families experience and the tools, resources, and support we can offer to make managing finances through these trying times easier.You can download and print the PDF version of our flyer for the FFS Webinar Series Flyer!