Articles
BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA!
By Karl C. Priest October 21, 2008 (revised 6-30-2010)
NOTE: With a mixture of amazement that scientists could be so dumb (The ones who bled George Washington to death don’t compare to evolutionists who are willingly DUMB.) and a feeling that the point has been solidly made, I stopped adding to this article regularly on February 5, 2010. However, if something comes to my attention (like the cartoon
at the bottom) that is too good to resist, it will be added.
The title of this article is based upon a literary attempt to show side-splitting laughter. Although he may not have originated the concept, my friend David Bump, often used BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA! and BLEEAAAARGHGHGH! in his commentaries on evolutionist foolishness.
There are other (in my opinion less emphatic) ways to express rip roaring laughter. "LOL is one of many initialisms for expressing bodily reactions, in particular laughter, as text, including initialisms such as ROTFL ("roll(ing) on the floor laughing"), a more emphatic expressions of laughter, and BWL ("bursting with laughter")”. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LOL)
I cannot help cracking up at the stupidity of highly educated true believers in evolutionism. Nearly all articles reporting really neat scientific research are degraded by an obsession with paying homage to Darwin. Of course, some of the reasons for inserting nonsense into the reports is merely to keep the money flowing into the research programs or to keep face with deluded colleagues. Even if the former reason is the motivation—it shows the sad state of science, or maybe I should say scientism.
I get angry when I think of innocent children being blatantly lied to about evolution being true. The best way to handle my anger is with humor. Fortunately, evolutionists make it easy to laugh at them.
Just consider this 2006 example form the pen of renowned evolutionary entomologist Dr. George Poinar. “The humble beginnings and evolution of insects are wrapped in a shroud of mystery and controversy, owing in part to their great diversity. Because many of the crucial fossils that could answer significant questions are fragmentary or are of doubtful age, some people might claim that their designation is more a philosophical exercise than a scientific study. Indeed, one paleoentomologist—Robin John Tillyard (1881-1937)—is reported to have taken his specimens to a clairvoyant in hopes of receiving some message about their true nature.” (http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/retracing-the-long-journey-of-the-insects ) How dare true believers in evolution even think about mocking creationists!
For a daily dose of anti-science hilarity see the NEWS section of Creation Safaris where you can find the “Stupid Evolution Quote of the Week”. Also, take a look at my article “Creation Safaris”.
Here is an example from the Creation Safaris website (bold font is in the original):
According to Live Science a beetle preserved in amber, dated at 100 million years old, was caught in the act of using chemical warfare. ‘Soldier beetles’ capable of this kind of advanced defense system were not thought to have evolved till 60 million years later.
This article contains several statements worthy of the Stupid Evolution Quote of the Week prize:
The discovery of a bug that roamed with the dinosaurs has shown that insects were equipped with chemical weapons much earlier than thought....
....the beetle fired an acidic repellent at the attacker—providing researchers with a frozen glimpse of a 100 million-year-old battle for survival.
What’s even more remarkable, he says, is that this finding pushes back the known existence of this type of beetle by about 60 million years, making it the earliest fossil record of chemical weaponry in animals....
....the researchers concluded that the insect was most likely a member of an extinct soldier beetle species which was an ancestor to modern soldier beetles that pack similar kinds of ammunition....
“That this type of defense has been preserved through 100 million years of evolution is evidence that it works pretty well.”
These quotes satisfy the prize criteria by: (1) attributing complex structures to evolution without explaining how they evolved (i.e., telling a just-so story), and (2) holding to evolutionary dating schemes even though the claim pushes the origin of the complex structure further back in time. (http://creationsafaris.com/crev200709.htm#zoo172)
Before I get into my examples of evolutionism guffaws, I will share an example of one that brings more of a “we (creationists) told you so” semi-sad snicker. In a paper revealing research that scientists have now realized that most forest problems are man made I found this comment:
“It now appears that insects, which are the most abundant and diverse animals on Earth, are anything but destructive pests. Rather, they are major architects of the plant world in both structure and function, and in natural balance help to maintain healthy and productive forest ecosystems.”
That was just a brief warm up for the real side-splitters to follow.
The following excerpts, about bee research, are from an article that is much ado about nothing, but the casual reader will “see” proof of evolution based upon the opening line: “A group of bees may have evolved into a new species because the guys couldn’t pick the right aftershave.” That really bugs me! Evolutionists have to be intelligent enough to comprehend the simple truth that no observable and repeatable scientific experiments have ever supported “evolution”. The bees remained bees despite the differences that gave the scientists a reason to classify (there is a lot of debate about defining a species within the evolutionist community) the bees as a different species of—bees!
One trick evolutionists use to fool gullible (and government school “educated”) individuals (especially those who are part of the mainstream media) is to toss in the word “evolution” here and there in an article about real science. Another trick (as revealed in this article and “Helping Evolutionists Get It Right” is to define “evolution” as any animal change that is actually a clear display of God’s design for animals to be able to vary (a darker coloration for example) to enhance survivability yet always (as observed billions of times for thousands of years) remaining whatever they are (such as moths). (See Moth Marathon.)
In the next paragraphs I have bolded the laughter triggers.
“If female bees care about the perfumes at the mating sites, a changed odor might not interest females who have traditional tastes, Eltz says. Also, a mutation that changed male sensitivity to an odor might affect some of the females too.” Eltz isn’t ready to say whether the HNDB-rich scent is the original or the new version. But either way, a new perfume might have led to a new species.
What ever they might find, bees will ALWAYS be bees. This is a real BEEBRRHAHA!
(http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/39052/title/Funny_smell
_may_have_split_bee_species)
Foraging honey bees on cocaine are more likely to dance, regardless of the quality of the food they've found or the status of the hive, the authors of the study report.
"The honey bee dance is this incredibly complex set of activities," Robinson said. "It's a very integrated communication system, very elaborate and very elegant…
Long story-short: Believing that selfish behavior (wanting to eat) was co-opted by bee “evolution” of social behavior (altruism) the scientist gave cocaine to bees and studied the change in their dance. The doped-up non-foragers did not dance (which is normal) and the foragers did not dance more or at inappropriate times or places. All that happened was that the bees were confused about the quality of the food. That cocaine would affect bees is an acceptable hypothesis and the plans to use bees to study human addiction is commendable, but the evolution of allusion qualifies this article is a great one for a gigantic guffaw.
(http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-12/uoia-hbo121908.php)
Continuing the theme, I have bolded laughter triggers in the next articles. If the bolded words need explanations you are probably a brainwashed believer in evolutionism. Keep reading and maybe you will have that “Aha!” moment of realization that, in reality, evolutionism is silly.
To their surprise, (Evolutionary biologists at McGill University) Khila and Abouheif discovered that "evolution has tinkered with the molecular signals that are used by the egg to determine what's going to be the head and what's going to be the tail, to stop the worker ants from producing viable offspring," Abouheif explained.
(http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-11/mu-wao111908.php)
(In an article about a species of beetle) Over the past 400 million or so years, the immune system of animals, and notably the relatively simpler system in insects, appears to have succeeded in preventing the evolution of microbial resistance.
(http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081129095531.htm)
(L)eaf-cutter ants have developed a system to try and keep their gardens pest-free; an impressive feat which has evaded even human agriculturalists.
(http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-11/sfgm-fac111408.php)
"We've discovered a really elegant developmental mechanism, which we call 'reproductive constraint,' that challenges the classic paradigm that behaviour, such as policing, is the only way to enforce harmony and squash selfish behaviour in ant societies," said Abouheif, McGill's Canada Research Chair in Evolutionary Developmental Biology.
(http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-11/mu-wao111908.php)
Butterfly wings - and lotus leaves - are able to repel water with ease because of the microstructures on their surface. The densely packed microscopic bumps of the lotus leaf and the waffle-like structures found on butterfly wings both make it difficult for water droplets to spread out. As a result, the drops roll off, and they take dirt with them. This makes the surfaces ideal as the basis for self-cleaning windows and windshields.
However, creating such surfaces is tough because it means creating a template using lithographic techniques usually reserved for chip making.
(http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20026855.900-butterfly-wings-used-to-print-selfcleaning-windows.html)
Now that you have the idea I will no longer bold laughter triggers and you should enjoy the rest of the article and feel free to laugh out loud as I did and have indicated throughout the remainder of this article.
Following are excerpts of actual evolutionist quotes that will prove my point of the idiocy of evolutionism. My comments are in [ ].
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
A lot of the malarkey mused by monkey-men fits well into my article “Helping Evolutionists get it Right ”. Originally that is what I did. In September 2009 I arbitrarily started placing the snips into one or the other. If you like this article, you also should read the other one.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[I do not use the term "Oh, my God" or even "OMG", but I had to really restrain myself as I read this report.]
Jeweled beetles’ resplendent shells have physicists green with envy. Intricate arrangements of cells on the beetles’ outer layers manipulate light in a special way, a study published online July 23 in Science reveals. Understanding the shell’s structure might prove useful for designing new optical devices.
Stealing the beetles’ tricks may also help researchers design materials with desirable optical properties, comments Michael Barnes of the University of Massachusetts Amherst. Although it’s too early to say what specific devices might be created with inspiration from the beetle shell, “the scientific goal is to understand the 'what' and the 'how' of micro- and nanoscale structures in natural systems,” he says, “so that we can design our own systems for specific purposes.”
What’s more, people may be able to take a lesson from the beetle in manufacturing such materials using microstructures. “The beetle doesn’t use any harmful chemicals,” Srinivasarao says. “Here is a creature that’s figured out how to do this very easily.”
[Did you notice the following guffaw getters? >“physicists green with envy” “Stealing the beetles’ tricks” “might be created with inspiration from the beetle shell” “take a lesson from the beetle” “Here is a creature that’s figured out how to do this very easily”< If I have to explain the nonsensical non-science that is rampant in evolutionist rhetoric, then you are still suffering from your public school brain-washing. Just keep reading this website and praying. You can be rescued!]
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/45845/title/Beetle_masters_optics
Some of the beetle's design protocols could be utilised already with tailor-made mineral designs such as Imerys' CarboFlexTM range. The company is now planning to assess the feasibility of taking these design protocols to the next level in order to produce beetle-inspired ultra-white coatings on a large scale. [Oh my, I can hardly contain the urge to call this man a fool. Even a middle school student would notice the contradiction in tht statement!]
Professor Pete Vukusic of the University of Exeter said: "Natural systems are packed with inspirational designs that have evolved [Oh my, I can hardly contain the urge to call this man a fool. Even a middle school student would notice the contradiction in that statement! But, I repeat myself.] to serve key biological functions. Developing scientific knowledge about where to look and then how to take technological or industrial insight from them is an increasingly important practise, especially in this current financial climate. On this occasion, the Cyphochilus beetle has bridged the distance between university research and industrial application. There are a great many other natural systems awaiting discovery or detailed study that will certainly do the same."[Evolutionists don’t come close to comprehending what they do not know.]
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-06/uoe-bsi061009.php
--------------------
Migrating insects fly in the fast lane
[Deluding evolutionists think in the slow lane]
[To tack on a TOTALLY USELESS reference to "evolution" while admitting (although unintentionally) the “SOPHISTICATED” and “AMAZING” attributes of creation is profoundly proclaimed by “The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God” (Psalms 14:1a and 53:1a). Also, see THIS ARTICLE and THIS PAGE.]
The reported study was funded by BBSRC and used two sets of specially-designed radar equipment to observe migrating butterflies and moths flying several hundreds of metres above the ground, and to describe the sophisticated flight behaviours that they have evolved. These insect migrants have a compass sense that enables them to select winds which will take them in their chosen direction, and to travel at speeds of up to 100 km per hour. The fast speeds of winds aloft mean that insects travel more-or-less downwind, but they make subtle adjustments to their headings so that they partially correct for wind-induced drift away from their preferred direction of travel.
Dr. (x) said "Migratory butterflies and moths have evolved an amazing capacity to use favourable tailwinds.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-02/babs-mif020110.php
--------------------
“It is difficult - and sometimes impossible - to determine the workings of evolution, but it is likely that amygdalin is produced in the almond nectar so as to give the almond tree an advantage in reproduction. Based on our observations, we can make a guess at which mechanisms come into play for amygdalin to provide this advantage,” Prof. Izhaki explains. For example, even though amygdalin is poisonous for mammals, it is not poisonous for insects, such as the honey bee, and it even produces a stimulant that attracts such insects. Therefore, it is possible that the plant produces it so as to attract potential pollinators. Another possibility is that the almond tree has developed this substance in its nectar as a form of filter: it repulses “non-expert” pollinators, but gives access to the “experts” that have built up resistance to the toxin while providing efficient pollination services for the plant.
http://newmedia-eng.haifa.ac.il/?p=2349
[The above is beyond laughable and well into lubricious and definitely deserves derision, but the next one is(let me consult a thesaurus) bizarre, comical, crazy, farcical, foolish, laughable, nonsensical, outlandish, preposterous, silly, and/or zany. I could go on. Just do the simple probability calculations and you will understand why those adjectives apply.]
Figs and fig wasps have evolved to help each other out: Fig wasps lay their eggs inside the fruit where the wasp larvae can safely develop, and in return, the wasps pollinate the figs.
More than 700 species each of fig trees and wasps have co-evolved in the tropics worldwide, with each fig tree species having its own species of pollinating wasp. Jandér worked on six fig tree-fig wasp pairs for the study. Some wasp species passively carry pollen that sticks to their bodies, while others actively collect pollen in special pouches.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-01/cu-trw012710.php --------------------
The surfaces of many insect wings have evolved properties materials scientists only dream of for their creations… With that data in hand, they then used wing membrane as a "natural template" to cast a polymer surface and so duplicate the surface structure of the wing in PDMS, polydimethylsiloxane, the same type of silicone gel used in breast implants. One of the advantages of this approach is that no prior "design" of the surface of the material is needed and so the team can exploit the enormous diversity of surface types from different insects and so produce materials with specific characteristics. [Man oh man! Evos just kep steppin’ in their own piles of you-know-what! Oh, BTW, I added the bold font.]
--------------------
Miesenböck adds that the simple brain of a fly likely can tell us much about how more complex brains work. "As a general rule, biology tends to be conservative," he said. "It's rare that evolution 'invents' the same process several times." [Brainless evolution does not invent anything! See "Evolution is Lethal Antiscience" and other links at that website.]
http://www.world-science.net/othernews/091015_memories.htm
--------------------
"'How the scout bees select candidate sites, deliberate among choices and reach a verdict is a process complicated enough to rival the dealings of any corporate committee,’" Seeley wrote in a recent article in American Scientist [Should be “American Secularist”] magazine…[After elaborating on the astounding abilities of bees the article states “Honeybees have evolved to rely on this quorum or majority method…” [That is HILARIOUS!]
http://www.livescience.com/animals/060502_bee_decision.html
--------------------
(C)ertain kinds of bees have in turn adapted their bodies especially to suit such flower shapes. [If humans could do that the dieting, body building, and nip-and-tuck surgery industries would be out of business.]
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090517214622.htm
--------------------
Even more [imaginary] primitive termites may have [more imagination] fed on a range of things they could digest themselves, Poinar said, but eventually [by “hocus pocus”] they acquired protozoa that dramatically increased their ability to digest cellulose, and through [imaginary] evolutionary processes they came to depend on it. [Crock!]
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-05/osu-dia051409.php
--------------------
As the researchers suggested, perhaps evolution has optimized ant traffic flow, since ants are known to have highly developed social behaviors… Therefore it is not surprising that evolution has optimized the behavior of the ants (or all social insects). [“Optimize” means “to make as perfect or effective as possible.” Demented Darwinist actually personify (no, deify) evolution.]
http://www.physorg.com/news157627187.html
--------------------
Drosophila harbor substantial genetic variation for antibacterial defense, and investment in immunity is thought to involve a costly trade-off with life history traits, including development, life span, and reproduction. To understand the way in which insects invest [Sure! They also invest on Wall Street.] in fighting bacterial infection…
(http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1000385)
--------------------
The mocker swallowtail butterfly, Papilio dardanus, is unusual because it emerges from its chrysalis with one of a large number of different possible wing patterns and colours. This is different from most butterfly species which are identified by a common wing pattern and colour. Furthermore, some of the different patterns that the mocker swallowtail exhibits mimic those of poisonous species, which affords this harmless insect a valuable disguise which scares off predators.
Biologists are interested in finding out exactly how wing pattern is determined in the mocker swallowtail, because they believe that understanding how these different mimic patterns evolved may shed new light on whether such evolutionary changes occur in small gradual steps, or sudden leaps.
[Yeah, they “believe” all right. LOL. But are there other possibilities? Could the first mocker have had this ability already?]
In the 1950s scientists realised there must be a genetic 'switch' controlling which of the numerous possible wing patterns is expressed in each individual mocker swallowtail, but until now the location and identity of the genes involved have remained a mystery.
[I have never seen a switch that wasn’t designed, but this organism is viable and the switch is incomprehensibly more complicated than any switch designed by a human engineer evolved. It took scientists 50 years locate the gene. LOL!]
[He goes on to emphasise the significance of studying the mocker swallowtail, saying:] "You could argue that there would be little point in a species which slowly evolved to mimic a poisonous butterfly over the course of generations - the disguise is only useful if full and complete. This could suggest the possibility of sudden leaps in evolution occurring in this species, which would be an incredibly exciting discovery - by studying the changes in gene sequences we will find out if this happened or not."
[Sounds like he read some Duane Gish material. “Sudden leaps” is just a way of dodging the reality that there is no evidence of gradual evolution. LOL!!]
Only females of the species exhibit the wing patterns that mimic other butterflies. All the males are yellow, with black markings and have the typical tails of most swallowtail butterflies.
[Sooo, let me get this right. The mocker females evolved this ability, but the males did not. Hmmm, seems to me like there should not be any mockers around. ROTFL]
(http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-02/icl-mod021908.php)
--------------------
According to Amdam, the developmental program of diapause, that also typifies solitary insects without castes, was "adopted by evolution to produce Polistes females that look the same but differ in their potential to attain two distinct social roles."
"The fact that workers and queens can emerge from ancestral pathways in both complex and more primitive social insects helps us understand what evolution builds from when it produces seemingly radical new phenotypes," Amdam says.
[Evolution adopts and builds? Get real! Evolution, according to them, is blind. Evolutionists must be blind not to see the contradictions of there rhetoric. LOL]
(http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070907092935.htm)
--------------------
She and her colleagues believe that the unique way in which the Australian cycad uses smells to repel and attract pollinators may represent the evolutionary transition between plants using smells to repel pests and others using smells to attract pollinators.
[They “believe”. Can I get an “amen” brother? BWL HA]
( http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12739-ancient-plant-has-hot-stinky-sex.html)
--------------------
The researchers selected this species because it appears to represent an evolutionary transition.
“It’s been 100 to 150 million years since there was a common ancestor for paper wasps and honey bees, and during that time the DNA has changed a lot.”
[Hocus, pocus and “it appears!” LOL!]
(http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-09/uoia-wgs092707.php)
--------------------
Male water striders have evolved grasping hooks that grip the female in place as he tries to mate with her. To foil the males, females have evolved spines to dislodge unwelcome lovers.
Males want to spread their genes far and wide and mate with as many females as possible. Females would rather keep mating to the minimum.
[ BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA!]
( http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/02/0214_020214_TVnastywar.html)
--------------------
So the females evolved a defense: structures called paragenitals that guide a male's needle-like member into a spongy reservoir of immune cells.
The bugs exhibit a fantastic example of evolution at work, Reinhardt said.
[BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA! BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA!]
(http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/09/070925-bat-bugs.htm)
--------------------
Promiscuous females were more fecund and laid more viable eggs than monogamous ones. Amongst promiscuous females, those mated with multiple males (freedom for mate choice) had significantly higher reproductive output than those mated daily with a new unmated male.
Thus, promiscuity has both short- and long-term benefits and is advantageous to ladybirds. The presence of long-term benefits in terms of fitter offspring probably indicates the evolutionary rationale behind the prevalence of promiscuity in ladybirds.
[ “Evolutionary rationale” for ladybird (ladybug) promiscuity? BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA!]
( http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/cup/ber/2005/00000095/00000006/
art00004?crawler=true)
--------------------
In the jungles of Central and South America, a group of birds has evolved a unique way of finding food -- by following hordes of army ants and letting them do all the work.
[How many birds starved while the species figured out this trick? BWL!]
(http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071016092103.htm)
--------------------
In evolutionary terms, worker ants are the supreme altruists because they dedicate their lives to bringing up the offspring of another individual – their queen – while remaining sterile themselves. This is also true of many other social insects, which perplexed Charles Darwin and generations of biologists who came after him because it appeared to contradict the central idea of evolution – leaving behind as many of your own offspring as possible.
Human altruism may be far more complex, but the humble ant has at least given us a hint of how our own unselfish behaviour first evolved.
[Of course, God said it first and said it correctly: “Consider the ant.” WINK]
( http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article3052357.ece)
To protect themselves from this so-called traumatic insemination, lady bat bugs have evolved extra genitalia.
In the bat bugs, the female develops a specialized abdominal organ with covered cavities to receive the male's sperm and minimize damage to the rest of her body. But it gets more bizarre. Because the sexes look alike--and homosexual mating attempts are common--the males develop an organ similar to the defensive female genitalia. But, unlike the females, they leave the organ's cavities open, apparently to maintain some distinction. Scientists have suggested that such sexual conflict and the evolution it forces can ultimately lead to speciation, but others disagree.
That suggests that females mimic males that already look like females to avoid sexual harassment. But not all females chose this protection.
But speciation would require that some male bat bugs evolve to prefer reproducing with one female form while other males evolve to prefer reproducing with the other female form, he adds; whether that happens "remains to be seen."
[The author tries to promote homosexuality in her attempt to describe some of the supposed sexual activities of the bug. Of course the overall theme is imaginary evolution. It looks like devolution and a lot of things scientists do not understand. BIG GRIN]
(http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2007/1109/3)
--------------------
The cocoon and nest silks we looked at consist of coiled coils - a protein structural arrangement where multiple helices wind around each other. This structure produces a light weight, very tough silk,” she says.
Honeybee larvae produce silk to reinforce the wax cells in which they pupate, bulldog ant larvae spin solitary cocoons for protection during pupation, bumblebee larvae spin cocoons within wax hives (the cocoons are reused to store pollen and honey), and weaver ants use their larvae as ‘tools’ to fasten fresh plant leaves together to form large communal nests..
These groups of insects have evolved silks that are very tough and stable in comparison to the classical sheet silks and it is probable that the evolution of this remarkable material has underpinned the success of the social Hymenoptera.
Coiled coil silks are common in aculeate social insects i.e. those that have stings but not in aculeate parasitic wasps. These social insects are higher up the evolutionary tree and the coiled coil silks appear to have evolved about 155 million years ago.
[She credits evolution without having any proof. LOL!]
(http://www.biologynews.net/archives/2007/11/26/bees_are_the_new_silkworms.html)
--------------------
The wasp, being much smaller than the cockroach, has evolved a fine sting that can deliver a venom cocktail directly into the cockroach’s brain. The poisons effectively turn the cockroach into a zombie.
[Medical doctors go to med school in order to learn how to provide precise anesthesia. BWL!!]
(http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12983-zombie-cockroaches-revived-by-brain-shot.html)
--------------------
This finding pushes back the known existence of this type of beetle by about 60 million years.
"That this type of defense has been preserved through 100 million years of evolution is evidence that it works pretty well."
[Or, it is evidence that they were designed very well and have not changed since. BWL!!]
(http://www.livescience.com/animals/070904_ancient_battle.html)
--------------------
”In most species, there are reasons why a mother does not reproduce at the optimum age, whether that is because she has not yet met a suitable mate or food resources are scarce,” said Professor Allen Moore of the University of Exeter. “To cope with this fact, it seems that species have evolved to adapt their parenting to their age.”
“It makes evolutionary sense for the window for motherhood to be as wide as possible, giving the best chance for reproduction.”
[Nothing is sensible in the non-sensical world of evolutionism. OK, maybe in the context of a Kipling “Just So” story. BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA! ]
(http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071127113246.htm)
--------------------
The new species has unique characteristics. They are the only ants that have a rear third of the body, called the gaster, connected directly to the middle section, called the thorax. That connection is almost identical to the bodies of wasps, from whom these ants are believed to have descended some 70 to 80 million years ago.
The new Madagascar species, with far fewer natural predators, may never have needed to evolve a more flexible body.
"The big question is, what has led to this amazingly successful development in evolution? It's so important because it will help us reconstruct the ancestral character of all the ants, and it will require us to rethink the entire process of ant evolution." (Brian Fisher, the assistant curator of entomology at the California Academy of Sciences in San Francisco)
[Here is some advice to you true believers: Rethink that ants have not evolved. They have always been ants and always will be ants! BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA! ]
( http://www.sfgate.com/cgi- bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/01/15/MN138629.DTL)
--------------------
A type of beetle that lives its entire life burrowing through stored grain has been found to lack full colour vision, and what’s more the vision it does have breaks the rules. Most other insects have trichromatic vision – they are sensitive to ultraviolet, blue and long wavelength light. In a report published in the online open access journal Frontiers in Zoology, scientists reveal that this beetle has lost photoreceptors that are sensitive to blue wavelengths.
The red flour beetle (Tribolium castaneum) is a common pest that attacks milled grain products such as flour and cereals. It is a cryptozoic insect, meaning that it lives in the dark. Markus Friedrich from Wayne State University in Detroit, along with colleagues from St Louis and Cincinnati, performed genetic analyses to probe the evolution of the species’ vision.
The research suggests that the beetle may have gained an evolutionary advantage through this adaptation. Dr Friedrich states that the work “raises the possibility that opsin co-expression is of advantage under conditions where brightness sensitivity is critical.”
[Hey fool, it is just plain old “devolution” which is real observable science. ROTFL!!]
(http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-12/bc-hop121907.php)
--------------------
Most modern-day groups of beetles have been around since the time of the dinosaurs and have been diversifying ever since, says new research out in Science today (Friday 21 December 2007).
[In other words, they have not changed. They have always been beetles and always will be beetles! LOL!]
There are approximately 350,000 species of beetles on Earth, and probably millions more yet to be discovered, accounting for about 25% of all known life forms on the planet. The reason for this large number of beetle species has been debated by scientists for many years, but never resolved.
Lead scientist on the study, Professor Alfried Vogler from Imperial College London’s Department of Life Sciences and the Natural History Museum’s Department of Entomology, explains: “The large number of beetle species existing today could very well be a direct result of this early evolution and the fact that there has been a very high rate of survival and continuous diversification of many lineages since then.”
[He provides no proof of early evolution and states the obvious—there are lots of beetles. Hey, maybe the late evolutionist was correct when he said, God (if He exists) has “a n inordinate fondness for beetles”. LOL LOUDER ]
Prior to this study the survival success of beetles had been attributed to herbivory - feeding on plants - and the rise of flowering plants in the Cretaceous era, which started some 140 million years ago. However, mapping species numbers onto the evolutionary tree shows that many modern beetle lineages significantly pre-date the appearance of the first flowering plants.
[Just another change in the fairy tale. BWL!]
The scientific team says that understanding the evolution of beetles is an important part of understanding the natural world: “With beetles forming such a large proportion of all known species, learning about their relationships and evolution gives us important new insights into the origin of biodiversity and how beetles have triumphed over the course of nearly 300 million years,” said Professor Vogler.
[What malarkey! Just more pandering and setting up for more $$$. BWL!!!]
(http://www.biologynews.net/archives/2007/12/20/lifes_6legged_survivors_evolutionary_
study_shows_beetles_are_in_it_for_the_long_run.html)
--------------------
Now an international team has published the most comprehensive look yet at the amazing diversity of the beetle family tree--a view that may overturn a popular theory about how the insects evolved.
[In other words, evolutionists will concoct another story to futilely attempt to prop up their beliefs. ROTFL!!!]
(http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2007/1220/2)
--------------------
It is commonly accepted that phytophagous beetles and their host plants (mainly the likewise speciose angiosperms or flowering plants) have radiated in concert since the origin of both groups in the early Cretaceous. Indeed, this is a text-book example of coevolution and a straightforward interpretation of the forces driving evolution and the rise of new species.
However, a new molecular study by Dr. Jesús Gómez-Zurita and collaborators in the Natural History Museum in London challenges this view. This study shows that at least in the leaf beetles (Chrysomelidae; 40,000 species) this association is apparently out of sync.
[Evolution is out of sync with reality. BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA! ]
(http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070411073549.htm)
--------------------
Call it the cuckoo of butterflies. Like the well-known birds, the Alcon blue butterfly has found a way to get others to raise its offspring. Researchers in Denmark report that the large blue butterfly has managed to produce larvae with a chemical coating similar to that of the local Myrmica rubra ants.
[No way! It was designed! LOL! LOL!]
According to Dr. (Jeremy) Thomas of the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, "About 10% of myrmecophiles have evolved a much more one-sided relationship, in which they infiltrate ant societies and exploit the resources of the colony. They have turned into insect versions of the cuckoo. It is an extraordinary and extreme adaptation to get access to a plentiful supply of food and protection."
[Pure crock! BWL! BWL!!]
M. rebeli, and probably M. arion, (Maculinea arion) fool the ants into believing they are one of their own by mimicking the complex cocktail of 30-40 chemicals that ants use to communicate with one another.
[Comlex communication is a delightful design. ROTFL! ROTFWL!!]
(http://biology.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://unisci.com/stories/20011/0306016.htm)
--------------------
Ulrike Heberlein, who studies the genetics of alcohol-induced behaviour at the University of California, San Francisco…says dopamine is central to the neural reward circuits that evolved to motivate animals to seek food and sex.
[Scientists use intoxicated genetically modified fruit flies to get a model for exploring human sexual behavior. Lots of good science is done with the tiny fruit fly. Nothing supporting evolution has ever been achieved though. What were the flies eating, and how were they reproducing while the “millions of years of “evolution” occurred? BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA! BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA! ]
(http://www.newscientist.com/channel/sex/dn13136-randy-flies-reveal-how-booze-
affects-inhibitions.html?feedId=online-news_rss20)
--------------------
This is a very interesting realignment of how one thinks about how insect clocks work. There was no reason to suspect that the butterfly clock would be different from that of Drosophila. That it is different has already told us something about how circadian clocks have evolved,” explained Reppert. “What we have in the butterfly is an astounding clock mechanism, one that is more similar to our own circadian clock and less similar to the clock of the fly! The presence and function of two distinct CRYs suggest that the monarch’s is an ancestral clock; a clock that, over the course of evolution, has changed differently in other insects and mammals.
[ William Paley ( Natural Theology: or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity) got it right. PTL!]
(http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-01/uomm-sut010708.php)
--------------------
Contrary to other termites, the species of this subfamily-cannot digest either cellulose or lignin, basic constituents of their food plants, and therefore call on the services of a symbiotic relationship with a higher fungus. Using roughly chewed and only slightly digested plant material, they make a small ventilated structure, the fungus comb or garden, on which the mycelium of a Termitomyces, a Basidiomycete fungus of the same family as the Lepiota, will grow.
This fungus will gradually break down the ligneous and cellulose-bearing material amassed on the comb into substances that are easier for the termites to assimilate. The entomologists focusing on these fascinating social insects have long considered the symbiotic relationship between the Macrotermitinae and the fungus Termitomyces was one of interaction specificity, in that one species of termite associated with a single species of fungus, following a system elaborated by co-evolution that began several tens of millions of years ago.
A study recently published by an international research team, jointly involving IRD scientists, brought proof that this symbiotic relationship is much more complex and diversified than was suspected.
[Scientist continually find out that the insect world (and all of life) is imensly more complex than they suspected. If they were honest they would admit that life is too complicated to have evolved. LOLBWLROTFL!!!]
(http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080111221340.htm)
--------------------
A pest insect known as bollworm is the first to evolve resistance in the field to plants modified to produce an insecticide called Bt, according to a new research report. Bt-resistant populations of bollworm, Helicoverpa zea, were found in more than a dozen crop fields in Mississippi and Arkansas between 2003 and 2006.
"What we're seeing is evolution in action," said lead researcher Bruce Tabashnik.
[Calm down you zealot! All this means is that the bolls that were not resistant died off. BIG, BIG GRIN]
(http://www.physorg.com/news121614449.html)
--------------------
Ants took up farming some 50 million years ago, according to researchers who traced the ancestry of farmer ants. An analysis of the DNA of farmer ants traced them back to an original ancestor — a sort of adam ant, at least for the types that raise their own food, according to a paper in the online edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
In the last 25 million years ants have developed different types of farming including the well-known leaf-cutter ants, according to entomologists Ted Schultz and Sean Brady at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History.
[Fertilizer supplied by evolutionists. BIG OH WEST VIRGINIA CHUCKLE]
(http://www.mercurynews.com/healthandscience/ci_8680961)
--------------------
Darwin 's tree of life represents the path and estimates the time evolution took to get to the current diversity of life. Now, new findings suggest that this tree, an icon of evolution, may need to be redrawn. In research to be published in the April 13 advance onlin issue of Nature, researchers at Rockefeller University and the University of Tokyo have joined forces to reveal that insects have adopted a strategy to detect odors that is radically different from those of other organisms -- an unexpected and controversial finding that may dissolve a dominant ideology in the field.
[I’d like to have a dime for every time I have read something about “redrawing” some sacred aspect of evolutionism. BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA! ]
(http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-04/ru-ier041108.php)
--------------------
The contentious debate about why insects evolved to put the interests of the colony over the individual has been reignited by new research from the University of Leeds, showing that they do so to increase the chances that their genes will be passed on.
[Evolutionists always say that. All it means is that God designed insects(and all life forms) to reproduce. Read it in Genesis. BIG WINK!]
The concept of 'kin selection' was developed in 1964 by the evolutionary biologist Bill Hamilton, first proposed by Charles Darwin to explain, for example, why sterile workers evolved in social insect groups and why a honeybee would sacrifice its life to defend the colony. Charles Darwin recognized that such altruistic behaviour in highly social insect groups was at odds with his theory of natural selection, and Bill Hamilton's theory of kin selection showed that this behaviour can evolve because it still fulfills the drive to pass on genes - but through relatives instead.
[“Why” is answered by true believers’ (in evolution) imagination. “How”, which evolutionism cannot grasp, is answered with science. BIG WIDE GRIN]
But this paradigm was challenged in 2005 by the eminent academic E.O. Wilson, the founder of sociobiology, who pointed out that relatedness is rather low in some of today's social insects. He suggested that highly social behaviour evolves solely because individuals do better when they cooperate than when they live a solitary.
[Wilson, who abandoned his professed faith in Jesus Christ upon learning about evolution, is Debte Dodger #41 at http://www.lifescienceprize.org/. READ IT AND WEEP OH EVOLUTIOIST!]
Dr Hughes and colleagues at the Universities of Sydney and Sussex tested the two alternative theories by examining the level of relatedness between females in colonies of bees, wasps and ants, determined by DNA fingerprinting techniques, and using statistical methods to look at levels of monogamy in the ancestral social insects when they evolved up to 100 million years ago.
[CROCK!]
Dr Hughes said: "We have produced the first conclusive evidence that kin selection explains the evolution of social insects and that Wilson's hypothesis is most probably wrong.
[Is he afraid to say Wilson is wrong? I am not afraid to say they both are wrong. BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA!!!]
( http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080529141329.htm)
--------------------
In a bizarre war of the sexes, little fire ants have evolved a novel way to fight for their gender's genes, according to new research.
"It's a selfish strategy, initiated by females," explains Fournier. "Under this strategy, queens transmit 100% of their genome to future queens. Males must adapt or disappear, so they choose to thwart queens by eliminating the female genome in fertilized eggs."
"This illustrates the extraordinary imagination of nature - or of males - to counteract the female strategy," he adds. (Denis Fournier of the Université Libre in Brussels, Belgium)
[”Ants have evolved a novel way” using a “strategy” and “choose” and this “illustrates the extraordinary imagination of nature… BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA!! That cannot be done without intelligent decsisions! BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA!! ]
(http://bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?art=1870 )
--------------------
[REGAINING MY COMPOSURE. Every time I thought I have heard the ultimate ridiculous evolutionist statement I find that they can get even more ridiculous. The following clips (I had to put some bold font here) demonstrate why evolutionism is dangerous to science and should be mocked to extinction.]
A newly discovered parasite so dramatically transforms its host, an ant, that the ant comes to resemble a juicy red berry, ripe for picking…
"It's just crazy that something as dumb as a nematode can manipulate its host's exterior morphology and behavior in ways sufficient to convince a clever bird to facilitate transmission of the nematode," Dudley said.
Because the red abdomen clearly mimicked in both size and color the many red berries that attract birds, the biologists quickly suspected that the nematode had found a unique way to guarantee its transmission from ant host to bird host. The researchers spent the next couple of years trying to prove their hypothesis.
Yanoviak and Poinar reconstructed the life cycle of the nematode, though Yanoviak admits that they never saw a bird eat an ant's red gaster.
"This is a really great example of the kinds of complex host-parasite interactions that can co-evolve, and also of the role of serendipity in tropical biology," Dudley said.
(http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-01/uoc--apt011608.php)
Evolutionists are so blinded that when
the evidence plainly shows
there is no evolution they still try "see" it:
The world's oldest known example of a fig wasp has been found on the Isle of Wight. The fossil wasp is almost identical to the modern species, proving that this tiny but specialized insect has remained virtually unchanged for over 34 million years. (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100615191649.htm )
[LOL! BWL! ROTFL! BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA! BLEEAAAARGHGHGH! BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA! BLEEAAAARGHGHGH! BWAH HAH HAH! BLEEAAAARGHGHGH! BWAH HAH HAH HAAAA! BLEEAAAARGHGHGH! BLEEAAAARGHGHGH!]
Now that you’ve had a good laugh (to say the least) you will enjoy the article “Evolutionists Tacitly Admit Creation”.
---------------------------------
For more laughter read “If it wasn’t so Funny I’d Cry”.
An evolutionist trying to kill the fly of science truth.
The more he kills the worse the “ointment” of evolutionism smells.
(Dead flies cause the ointment of the apothecary to send forth a stinking savour: so doth a little folly him that is in reputation for wisdom and honour. Ecclesiastes 10:1 )
|
