We've moved to a better place...

You will be automatically redirected to the new address. If that does not occur, visit
http://www.relativelytinteresting.com
and update your bookmarks.

Showing posts with label myths. Show all posts

Thursday, October 13, 2011 ~ Have your say...

Does eating turkey really make you sleepy?

Thanksgiving has come and gone here in Canada, and is coming up in the USA.  Around the office and among friends, someone will undoubtedly comment that they were sleepy after their turkey dinner, and then someone else will pipe up and say, “That’s because turkey contains tryptophan, which makes you sleepy.”

While it is true that turkey does contain tryptophan and tryptophan does make humans sleepy, it’s not necessarily true that “eating turkey makes you sleepy”.  Here’s why.

L-tryptophan is an essential amino acid with a scientifically recognized sleep inducing effect. It is used in the body to produce niacin, a B Vitamin. Tryptophan can be metabolized into serotonin and melatonin, which are neurotransmitters that cause a calming effect and help to regulate sleep. But here’s the kicker:   L-tryptophan needs to be taken on an empty stomach and without any other amino acids or protein in order to make you drowsy.  In other words, the act of eating turkey (a source of protein) negates the sleep-inducing effects of tryptophan.

It's also worth noting that several other foods contain as much or more tryptophan than turkey including chicken, pork, and cheese. As with turkey, other amino acids are present in these foods besides tryptophan, so they negate the sleepiness effect.  Tryptophan also occurs naturally in red meat, other dairy products, nuts, seeds, bananas, soy products, tuna, and shellfish.  So turkey is nothing special when it comes to its concentration of tryptophan – you can get a similar dose by eating shrimp, tuna, snapper, and even chicken breast.  Oddly enough, people don’t react the same way after eating those items, do they?

So why do we feel sleepy after eating our turkey dinner, if it’s not the tryptophan?  

Consider this:  you’re on vacation, and you’re already feeling pretty relaxed.  You just ate a massive meal and probably ate too much.  You probably had high levels of carbohydrates and fats with your meal, and you probably had a drink or two (or three… or four).  

Digestion of large meals (overeating) causes blood to be directed away from your organs and nervous system to your digestive system, which induces sleepiness.  A meal that contains a lot of fat will cause the same effect.  The less blood you have circulating around the rest of your body, the more sleepy you will become.  Alcohol is a depressant and will, for a large part of the population, make you drowsy. All these things combine to make you sleepy and lethargic after your Thanksgiving feast!

Wednesday, July 6, 2011 ~ Have your say...

The hunt for mokele-mbembe: the Congo dinosaur

Mokele-mbembe - Almost Like Nessie

In the Lingala language, Mokele-mbembe literally means, "the one who stops the river". Just like Nessie, the Mokele-mbembe is said to be a living dinosaur of the sauropod kind which dwells in the Republic of Congo in the depths of the Likouala swamp region. Loosely, it is analogously comparable to Nessie, or the Loch Ness Monster of the Scottish Highlands.

According to eyewitnesses, especially the natives, the Mokele-mbembe have the body of an elephant, three clawed feet, with long reptile-like neck. It is hairless, and is said to be gray, brown, or reddish brown in color with very a long tail.

The First Mention

The first recorded mention of witness related to the Mokele-mbembe is dated back to 1776, in a book by Abbe Lievain Bonaventure which reports the exhibition of the French missionary to the Republic of Congo to explore the animals, plants and people of the region. The team stumbled upon a three clawed foot print, which was said to be three feet wide. When they asked the natives, they told the story of the river monster.

Spirit of the Congo River Basin

While most who had witnessed it believes that it is a living sauropod dinosaur, many elderly pygmies believe the folklore that the Mokele-mbembe is only an apparition of the spirits dwelling in the Congo River Basin. They believe in animism, that an immortal godlike being inhabits the Mokele-mbembe and serves as the guardian of the region. Because of these, they believe that Westerners should stop doing expeditions, leave it alone and treat the Mokele-mbembe with respect, or macabre shall befall them.

The Smithsonian Tragedy

During 1919 to 1920, the Smithsonian Institution sent 32 men on an expedition to the Republic of Congo to collect specimens of plants and animals. They often heard mysterious roars, which were described to be as 'unheard of and didn't belonged to any known being'. They also stumbled upon huge, unexplained trails. During a train ride, they had to go through a flooded area. It was said that villagers around there were screaming and terrified because they saw the Mokele-mbembe, and it was the cause of the flood (consistent to its name, 'one who stops the river').

However, it ended in tragedy as the train suddenly derailed, which killed four members, and seriously injuring 6 others. This was consistent to the folklore of the macabre befalling those who angers the Mokele-mbembe. This expedition was documented in the H.L. Shantz papers.


According to the Skeptic's Dictionary...

"Cryptozoologists argue that since a coelacanth was caught off the coast of South Africa, it is reasonable to think that a dinosaur might also have avoided detection for a few million years. However, there is a big difference between finding a fish thought to be extinct and finding a dinosaur. The fish is small and lives in the ocean. Oceans cover two-thirds of the earth and have depths of up to 35,000 feet. That is a lot of space to hide specimens and fragments of specimens. Dinosaurs are massive (at least the mokele-mbembe kind), occupied the third of the earth mostly visible to its other inhabitants, and thus would be much more likely to be detected than the coelacanth."  Well said.


Forever In Pursuit

So, is it a spirit? Is it a cryptic animal yet to be discovered that has eluded humans for ages? Dubbed as the 'last living dinosaur', the Mokele-mbembe is still hot in pursuit. Most believe that eye witnesses see what they want to see, or actually see the shape of another animal, thinking it is the Mokele-mbembe.

Even after 30+ expeditions over the years, the Mokele-mbembe still had not been found. There is no genuine, legitimate physical evidence that has been collected. Although ardent researchers and cryptozoologists do believe that there are living dinosaurs hiding in the depths of the wild today, with the Mokele-mbembe being one of them, there's no evidence ample enough to prove its existence.





References:

Friday, May 13, 2011 ~ Have your say...

Why We Don’t Need to Worry About An Undead Zombie Apocalypse

I love to watch everything I can about zombies… movies; TV shows; books; stories; and video games.

I realize they are purely fiction and for entertainment purposes only, but occasionally have to have a bit of a debate when people say to me, “You know, it could really happen.” As awesome as a undead zombie apocalypse might be, it simply can’t happen. And if it did, there isn’t much of a reason to worry.

Before we discuss why zombies are not really a threat, we must define the zombie type we'd be confronting in this version of the zombie apocalypse. I’m going to take the classic undead zombie with the following characteristics:
  • Semi-decayed, rotten body
  • "Hungry" for human brains and flesh
  • Shuffles, walks, or runs (depending on state of their limbs).  For the sake of this argument, movement speed doesn't really matter.
  • Their brain allows for basic functions only: hunt for food, kill enemies, stay “alive” (er, undead). 
  • They only know one word: “brraaaaaiiiins…..”

Here’s Why We Don’t Need to Worry About A Zombie Apocalypse.

1.  Unlike living things, zombies can’t heal

Over the days, weeks, months… zombies would take damage from humans and other predators. But since they’re reduced to a rotting corpse, they could not heal or regenerate. As muscle tissue was damaged, limbs would be rendered useless. Imagine a zombie with a slashed bicep muscle… he won’t be able to do any curls at the gym since the physical structure/mechanism of his arm is permanently damaged.

Speaking of predators…

2.  Zombies have lots of predators

Predators like dogs, raccoons, lions, tigers, ligers, vultures, and maggots. There are many scavengers who would take full advantage of a slow moving, smell-from-a-mile-away, piece of meat. Imagine a zombie walking through the forest? How far do you think he’d get before being nibbled away by The Racoons?

3.  In the winter, they’d freeze

Once the temperature hits zero degrees Celsius, they’d be in serious trouble. Since they’d have no mechanism to regulate their body heat, zombies would go stone cold like a Swanson Hungry Man frozen dinner in the freezer. The Canadians and Russians would surely have an advantage against the undead armies of the north.

And in the south...

4.  In the summer, they’d rot really quickly

In fact, the moist wet areas of the zombies would rot the quickest. But pretty much every zombie I’ve seen in the movies still has regular looking eyes even though they might be missing the lower half of their body. Depending on the surrounding conditions – like temperature and humidity – a body can decompose in a matter of days.

As a side note… the dramatic blood-exploding head shots that movies portray wouldn’t occur since there would be no circulation of blood… gravity would take its course, filling the lower parts of the body. So a head-shot would simply go through the head and splatter whatever matter has not yet been liquefied.

5.  Humans have lots and lots of weapons… and they know how to use them pretty well

In fact, in the USA alone, there are over 14 million gun owners. That’s a lot of guns. Plus, there’s this thing called the “military”, which has even more guns and ammo, and a ton of people who know how to use them.  If the USA could get Bin Laden, I've got to have some faith that they can take out zombies.

6.  Most importantly, if only the brain stem (or lower brain) is working, then zombies would have no senses (literally)

Several zombie “explanations” use the idea that the zombies have only base functionality in their brain. That is, the lower brain (or brain stem), is the only part that is functioning (in the TV series The Walking Dead, this explanation is used). But there would be a few problems if this were the case.

Mike Palige, from New York University, takes a look at this from a neuro-scientific approach. If we assume that only the brain stem is working then zombies…

• Shouldn’t be able to move… If only the lower portion of the brain is active, then the part that is not active is the motor cortex, which controls movement… and if that’s dead – then how could zombies walk or run? 

• Shouldn’t be able to see… If the sensory processing areas of the brain are dead, then how can zombies see? Sight is processed in the occipital lobe in the back of the brain. If that area is dead, then they should be completely blind.

• Shouldn’t be able to hear… Sound is processed in the temporal lobe of the brain – so that needs to be functioning as well for them to hear you.

• Shouldn’t be able to smell… In some instances, zombies can smell… but smell is processed by the olfactory nerve above the nasal cavities, which would also be shut down.

• Shouldn’t have a memory… If zombies have some form of memory then the frontal cortex – which does higher level thinking – then that would also have to functioning.

So in order to have any use of their senses, almost the entire brain must have some sort of function. And for that to happen, the brain needs oxygen and energy to feed the chemical reactions required to process pretty much anything… which means you still need working lungs, heart, circulatory system… So "Sally" the zombie, missing half her body, would not be able to do much of anything. She couldn’t even be a zombie – only dead.

Conclusion

Continue to suspend your disbelief and enjoy your zombie entertainment! You don’t have to worry about undead decaying zombies because they can’t really do anything other than lay on the ground and play dead. 

However, watch out for the zombies of 28 Days Later… ‘cause they ain’t really dead -  just really, really angry…

Update:  May 20th, 2011


The Center for Disease Control (CDC) has published a blog post entitled Preparedness 101:  Zombie Apocalypse.  Do they know something we we don't?  ....  No, they're just having fun.  In any case, it's definitely worth the read.




Tuesday, April 26, 2011 ~ Have your say...

Genesis: Revisited (squeezing the round peg of science into the square hole of religion)

Many of us, Christian or not, are familiar with the story of Genesis.  It tells us how the universe, our Earth and it's inhabitants were created.  It is similar to other Mesopotamian creation myths and offers a monotheistic (single god) perspective.  

But should it be taken literally?  Many Creationists will argue that it should. However, Michael Shermer has put forth a revised version of the myth.  Read on to watch a video, and read the transcript.  But first, let's review the story below...

The Story of Genesis


1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
 3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
 6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
 9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.
    11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.
 14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.
 20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.
 24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
    26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
 27 So God created mankind in his own image,
   in the image of God he created them;
   male and female he created them.
 28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”
    29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.
    31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

Michael Shermer's Genenis:  Revisited
"To convey the logical absurdity of trying to squeeze the round peg of science into the square hole of religion, I penned the following scientific revision of the Genesis creation story. It is not intended as a sacrilege of the poetic beauty of Genesis; rather, it is a mere extension of what the creationists have already done to Genesis in their insistence that it be read not as mythic saga but as scientific prose. If Genesis were written in the language of modern science, it would read something like this."




The transcript...

In the beginning — specifically on October 23, 4004 B.C., at noon — out of quantum foam fluctuation God created the Big Bang. The bang was followed by cosmological inflation. God saw that the Big Bang was very big, too big for creatures that could worship him, so He created the earth. And darkness was upon the face of the deep, so He commanded hydrogen atoms (which He created out of Quarks and other subatomic goodies) to fuse and become helium atoms and in the process release energy in the form of light. And the light maker he called the sun, and the process He called fusion. And He saw the light was good because now He could see what he was doing. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

And God said, Let there be lots of fusion light makers in the sky. Some of these fusion makers appear to be more than 4,004 light years from Earth. In fact, some of the fusion makers He grouped into collections He called galaxies, and these appeared to be millions and even billions of light years from Earth, so He created “tired light” — light that slows down through space — so that the 4004 B.C. creation myth might be preserved. And created He many wondrous splendors, including Red Giants, White Dwarfs, Quasars, Pulsars, Nova and Supernova, Worm Holes, and even Black Holes out of which nothing can escape. But since God cannot be constrained by nothing (can God make a planet so big that he could not lift it?), He created Hawking radiation through which information can escape from Black Holes. This made God even more tired than tired light, and the evening and the morning were the second day.

And God said, Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together unto one place, and let the continents drift apart by plate tectonics. He decreed sea floor spreading would create zones of emergence, and He caused subduction zones to build mountains and cause earthquakes. In weak points in the crust God created volcanic islands, where the next day He would place organisms that were similar to but different from their relatives on the continents, so that still later created creatures called humans would mistake them for evolved descendants. And in the land God placed fossil fuels, natural gas, and other natural resources for humans to exploit, but not until after Day Six. And the evening and the morning were the third day.

And God saw that the land was lonely, so He created animals bearing their own kind, declaring Thou shalt not evolve into new species, and thy equilibrium shall not be punctuated. And God placed into the land’s strata, fossils that appeared older than 4004 B.C. And the sequence resembled descent with modification. And the evening and morning were the fourth day.

And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creatures that hath life, the fishes. And God created great whales whose skeletal structure and physiology were homologous with the land mammals he would create later that day. Since this caused confusion in the valley of the shadow of doubt God brought forth abundantly all creatures, great and small, declaring that microevolution was permitted, but not macroevolution. And God said, “Natura non facit saltum” — Nature shall not make leaps. And the evening and morning were the fifth day.

And God created the pongidids and hominids with 98 percent genetic similarity, naming two of them Adam and Eve, who were anatomically fully modern humans. In the book in which God explained how He did all this, in chapter one He said he created Adam and Eve together out of the dust at the same time, but in chapter two He said He created Adam first, then later created Eve out of one of Adam’s ribs. This caused further confusion in the valley of the shadow of doubt, so God created Bible scholars and theologians to argue the point. 

And in the ground placed He in abundance teeth, jaws, skulls, and pelvises of transitional fossils from pre-Adamite creatures. One he chose as his special creation He named Lucy. And God realized this was confusing, so he created paleoanthropologists to sort it out. And just as He was finishing up the loose ends of the creation God realized that Adam’s immediate descendants who lived as farmers and herders would not understand inflationary cosmology, global general relativity, quantum mechanics, astrophysics, biochemistry, paleontology, population genetics, and evolutionary theory, so He created creation myths. But there were so many creation stories throughout the land that God realized this too was confusing, so he created anthropologists, folklorists, and mythologists to settle the issue. 

By now the valley of the shadow of doubt was overrunneth with skepticism, so God became angry, so angry that God lost His temper and cursed the first humans, telling them to go forth and multiply (but not in those words). They took God literally and 6,000 years later there are six billion humans. And the evening and morning were the sixth day.

By now God was tired, so God said, “Thank me its Friday,” and He made the weekend. It was a good idea.

In Conclusion...

What do you think?  Should the story of Genesis be taken literally?  If not, does it have room for science, or are they mutually exclusive?



References
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9EVMzVQKTk
Darwin: A Norton Critical Edition (Selected and Edited by Philip Appleman.) 2001. New York: W.W. Norton: 625–626.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1&version=NIV
http://www.michaelshermer.com/2001/12/genesis-revisited/

Monday, February 21, 2011 ~ Have your say...

10 Facts You Thought Were True… But Are Not…

10 Facts You Thought Were True… But Are Not…

“Fact 1”  The Color Red Makes Bulls Angry
Bulls are actually colorblind, and it doesn’t make a difference what color is used for a matador’s cape.   Bulls are naturally aggressive, and they might charge anything that irritates them… and they are very irritated when they are in the ring.  You would be too, if a matador was waving a cape in your face, and thousands of people were cheering and yelling after you got poked and prodded by sharp objects while in your pen.

“Fact 2”  Bats Are Blind

We’ve all heard the expression “blind as a bat”, however, bats aren’t entirely blind.  All species of bats have some degree of vision.  True, they use echolocation to spot their prey in the darkness of caves and night time, but given some amount of light, they will be able to see.

“Fact 3”  The Caesar Salad Was Named after Julius Caesar
Not only was it not named after the famous ruler, it wasn’t even invented in Rome.  The Caesar Salad was actually named after a chef named Caesar Cardini in 1924, at his restaurant in Tijuana.


“Fact 4”  The Lion Is King of the Jungle
Lions don’t even live in the jungle… they live  on the African plains.  Females do most of the hunting, not males, who are often associated as the hunter killers.

“Fact 5”  Baby Birds Handled by Humans Are Rejected By Their Parents
This is a very common misconception about birds, however, birds do not have a sense great sense of smell and they aren’t really bothered by it.  If you find a nestling (baby birds who are fuzzy and featherless), gently place the nestling back in the nest (if you can find it).  If you find a fledgling, then it is best to leave it alone, as it is part of a fledgling’s natural development to spend some time on the ground as it learns to fly. 

“Fact 6”  The “Immaculate Conception”  Refers to the Birth of Jesus
Seems reasonable, and it’s what most people believe, but the Immaculate Conception actually refers to the conception of Mary, who was conceived biologically.  According to tradition, at the time of her conception, Mary was protected by God from the stain of original sin, hence, “immaculate”.


“Fact 7”  The Keys on a Typewriter/Keyboard Are Arranged Specifically for More Efficient Typing

In today’s modern era, a large portion of the population are adept at typing, but the keys were not arranged for the typist’s convenience.  Instead, they were arranged in such a way as to slow down typists on old typewriters!  Originally, the inventor of the typewriter laid out the keys in alphabetical order, but he realized the keys would jam if typing occurred at a high speed because too many frequently used letters were placed too close together.  So the QWERTY system was developed to place the most frequently used letters as far apart on the keyboard as possible.  It was publicly and falsely claimed that the QWERTY system was scientifically devised to promote efficient typing.  Others have since invented more efficient systems, but the QWERTY system is so widely accepted that it’s nearly impossible to change.

“Fact 8”  All Mosquitoes Bite

Firstly, there isn’t a single mosquito that bites – they sting.  Secondly, only the females sting and suck up animal blood.  The males lack a proboscis which is used to penetrate the skin, and they feed on the juices of plants.

“Fact 9”  Saint Patrick Was Irish

Not quite… he was not Irish, and hated and feared them.  Born in Great Britain, he was abducted at age 16 by Irish marauders (or pirates).  He was taken to Ireland and sold into slavery where he spent 6 years.  Eventually, he escaped, but returned later as a Christian missionary, aiming to convert all Irish.  He succeeded, more or less, becoming the patron saint of his accidentally adopted homeland.  He died on March 17th…

“Fact 10”  Top Ten Lists are Unpopular on the Internet
Not at all true.  Top Ten Lists are incredibly popular, overused, and clichĂ©d… however… they are easy to digest; encourage debate; are inherently linkable; have a good chance of being spread or shared; are easy to write; are often insightful and interesting; aid in discovering new content; people love statistics; everybody does them; and they fare particularly well on social news sites where they have the opportunity to go viral.  So, top 10 lists will probably stick around for a while.

References:
Facts 1-9:
Amazing… but false!  Hundreds of facts you thought were true, but aren’t.
 
By David Diefendorf with a foreword by James Randi. 
Copyright 2007 The Reference Works

Fact 10:

http://modernl.com/article/10-reasons-why-top-10-lists-are-so-popular

Thursday, January 20, 2011 ~ Have your say...

10 Myths and Misconceptions About Evolution

Evolution VS Creationism:  How many times have you heard those words bundled together? 

Although there is no real debate in the scientific community with respect to evolution, creationists and “IDers” (those who believe in Intelligent Design, a fancy name for “creationism”) attempt to stir the pot in the quest to find the origin of life.

The Skeptic’s Society has once again created a wonderful ePamphlet that is available for download on their site.  It tackles the myths and misconceptions surrounding evolution, and is titled:  “Top 10 Myths About Evolution (And How We Know It Really Happened)”.

The myths include:

1)  If humans evolved from apes, why are apes still around?  (incidentally, this topic has been reviewed in a previous article on Relatively Interesting, called “If Humans Evolved From Apes, 
Why Do Apes Still Exist?”)


Humans, apes, and monkeys are only distant evolutionary “cousins.” We come not from apes but from a common ancestor that was neither ape nor human that lived millions of years in the past. In fact, during the last seven million years many human-like species have evolved; some examples include Homo habilis, Homo erectus, and Homo neanderthalensis. All of these went extinct at different times, leaving just us to share the planet with a handful of other primates.


2)  There are too many gaps in the fossil record for evolution to be true.


In fact, there are lots of intermediate fossils. Archaeopteryx, for example, is one of the earliest known fossil birds with a reptilian skeleton and feathers. There is now evidence that some dinosaurs had hair and feathers. Therapsids are the intermediates between reptiles and mammals, Tiktaalik is an extinct lobe-finned fish intermediate to amphibians, there are now at least six intermediate fossil stages in the evolution of whales, and in human evolution there are at least a dozen intermediate fossil stages since hominids branched off from the great apes six million years ago. Considering the exceptionally low probability that a dead plant or animal will fossilize it is remarkable we have as many fossils as we do. First the dead animal has to escape the jaws of scavengers. Then is has to be buried under the rare circumstances that will cause it to fossilize instead of decay. Then geological forces have to somehow bring the fossil back to the surface to be discovered millions of years later by the handful of paleontologists looking for them.

3)  If evolution happened over millions of years, why doesn’t the fossil record show gradual change?

Sudden changes in the fossil record are not missing evidence of gradualism; they are extant evidence of punctuation. Species are stable over long periods of time and so they leave plenty of fossils in the strata while in their stable state. The change from one species to another, however, happens relatively quickly (on a geological time scale) in a process called punctuated equilibrium. One species can give rise to a new species when a small “founder” group breaks away and becomes isolated from the ancestral group. This new founder group, as long as it remains small and detached, may experience relatively rapid change (large populations are genetically stable). The speciational change happens so rapidly that few fossils are left to record it. But once changed into a new species, the individuals will retain their phenotype for a long time, leaving behind many well-preserved fossils. Millions of years later this process results in a fossil record that records mostly stability. The punctuation is there in between the equilibrium.

4)  No one has ever seen evolution happen.

Evolution is a historical science confirmed by the fact that so many independent lines of evidence converge to this single conclusion. Independent sets of data from geology, paleontology, botany, zoology, biogeography, comparative anatomy and physiology, genetics, molecular biology, developmental biology, embryology, population genetics, genome sequencing, and many other sciences each point to the conclusion that life evolved. Creationists demand “just one fossil transitional form” that shows evolution. But evolution is not proved through a single fossil. It is proved through a convergence of fossils, along with a convergence of genetic comparisons between species, and a convergence of anatomical and physiological comparisons between species, and many other lines of inquiry. (In fact we can see evolution happen—especially among organisms with short reproductive cycles that are subject to extreme environmental pressures. Knowledge of the evolution of viruses and bacteria is vital to medical science.)

5)  Science claims that evolution happens by random chance. 

Natural selection is not “random” nor does it operate by “chance.” Natural selection preserves the gains and eradicates the mistakes. To illustrate this, imagine a monkey at a
typewriter. In order for the monkey to type the first 13 letters of Hamlet’s soliloquy by chance, it would take 2613 number of trials for success. This is 16 times as great as the total number of seconds that have elapsed in the lifetime of the solar system. But if each correct letter is preserved and each incorrect letter eradicated, the phrase “tobeornottobe” can be “selected for” in only 335 trials, or just seconds in a computer program. Richard Dawkins defines evolution as “random mutation plus nonrandom cumulative selection.” It is the cumulative selection that drives evolution. The eye evolved from a single, light sensitive spot in a cell into the complex eye of today not by chance, but
through thousands of intermediate steps, each preserved because they made a better eye. Many of these steps still exist in nature in simpler organisms.

6)  Only an intelligent designer could have made something as complex as the eye.

The anatomy of the human eye shows that it is anything but “intelligently designed.” It is built upside down and backwards, with photons of light having to travel through the cornea, lens, aqueous fluid, blood vessels, ganglion cells, amacrine cells, horizontal cells, and bipolar cells, before reaching the light sensitive rods and cones that convert
the light signal into neural impulses, which are then sent to the visual cortex at the back of the brain for processing into meaningful patterns. For optimal vision, why would an intelligent designer have built an eye upside down?

7)  Evolution is "only a theory".

All branches of science are based on theories, which are grounded in testable hypothesis and explain a large and diverse body of facts about the world. A theory is considered robust if it consistently predicts new phenomena that are subsequently observed. Facts are the world’s data. Theories are explanatory ideas about those data. Constructs and other nontestable statements are not a part of science. The theory of evolution meets all the criteria of good science, as determined by Judge William Overton in the Arkansas creationism trial:


• It is guided by natural law.
• It has to be explanatory by reference to natural law.
• It is testable against the empirical world.
• Its conclusions are tentative.
• It is testable and falsifiable.


If you can find fossil mammals in the same geological strata as trilobites then evolution would be falsified. No one has ever found such contradictory data.

8)  Evidence for human evolution has turned out to be fake, frauds, or fanciful.

Eager to discredit evolution, creationists ignore hominid fossil discoveries and cherry pick examples of hoaxes and mistakes in the belief that mistakes in science are a sign of weakness. This is a gross misunderstanding of the nature of science, which constantly advances by using both its mistakes and the successes. Its ability to build cumulatively on the past is how science progresses. The self-correcting feature of the scientific method is one of its most powerful assets. Hoaxes like Piltdown Man, and honest mistakes like Nebraska Man, Calaveras Man, and Hespero-pithecus, are, in time, corrected. In fact, it wasn’t creationists who exposed these errors, it was scientists who did so. Creationists simply read about the scientific exposĂ© of these errors, and then duplicitously claimed them as their own. Piltdown Man and backwards? This “design” only makes sense if natural
selection built eyes from available materials, and in the particular configuration of the ancestral organism’s pre-existing organic structures. The eye shows the pathways of evolutionary history, not intelligent design.

9)  The second law of thermodynamics proves that evolution is impossible.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics applies to closed, isolated systems. Since the Earth receives a constant input of energy from the sun—it is an open-dissipative system—entropy may decrease and order increase (though the sun itself is running down in the process). Thus, the Earth is not strictly a closed system and life may evolve without violating natural law. As long as the sun is burning, life may continue thriving and evolving, just like automobiles may be prevented from rusting, burgers can be heated in ovens, and all manner of things in apparent violation of Second Law entropy may continue. But as soon as the sun burns out, entropy will take its course and life on Earth will cease.

10)  Evolution can’t account for morality.

As a social primate species we evolved a deep sense of right and wrong in order to accentuate and reward reciprocity and cooperation, and to attenuate and punish excessive selfishness and free riding. As well, evolution created the moral emotions that tell us that lying, adultery, and stealing are wrong because they destroy trust in human relationships that depend on truth-telling, fidelity, and respect for property. It would not be possible for a social primate species to survive without some moral sense. On the constitution of human nature is built the constitutions of human societies.

Bonus myth (not in the pdf):
  “Believing” in evolution is no different than believing in any faith based religion.

I think this is more of an error in semantics when using the word “belief or believe”.  For example, I don’t “believe” in evolution.  I accept evolution because there is a convergence of evidence in the scientific community that indicates that evolution is a completely viable theory to explain the diversity of life.

I find it interesting to observe the debate between evolutionists and creationists.  The myths listed above invariably come up in many discussions, and the creationist will cling to some obscure anomaly, thinking that this one “missing piece” can bring down the entire theory.  Since one fact does not prove a theory, one anomaly does not disprove it either.  Again, it’s the convergence of data that makes a theory sound.

In any case, I highly recommend the aforementioned download, as it can be used as a plain-English, simple way to defend evolution against its myths and misconceptions.


References:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...