Astrobiologists Offer an “Information-Based View of the Biosphere”

astrobiologists, atmosphere, biosphere, complex specified information, DNA processors, evolutionists, Gaia, humans, information, information processing, Intelligent Design, life, Life Sciences, nucleotide operations, ocean surface, plate tectonics, PLOS Biology, processing speed, prokaryotes, supercomputers, Titan supercomputer, United Kingdom Centre for Astrobiology at the University of Edinburgh, Universe Today, University of Edinburgh, volcanoes, water, yottabases, yottaNOPS
Even if their estimates need to be revised by a terabase or two someday, they have made it clear that our biosphere is awash in information. Source
Read More

Getting It Together: Tethers, Handshakes, and Multitaskers in the Cell

aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases, anticodon, biochemistry, Caltech, channel guards, condensates, cubicles, DNA, DNA translation, double duty, droplets, dual affinity, dual affinity proteins, endoplasmic reticulum, ER–mitochondria encounter structure, eukaryotes, Evolution, evolutionarily conserved, Intelligent Design, membrane lipids, membranes, mitochondria, molecular biology, molecular machines, multitasking, offices, organelles, paradigm shift, peroxisomes, PLOS Biology, proteins, Ptc5, speckles, tethers, TIM, tom, transfer RNA, tRNA
Running a cell requires coordination. How do molecules moving in the dark interior of a cell know how and when to connect? Protein tethers offer new clues. Source
Read More

Fruit Fly Eyes and More Surprises for Darwin

apoptosis, biology, body systems, Charles Darwin, circulation, convergent strategies, courtship, Current Biology, descending neurons, digestion, Drosophila melanogaster, Evolution, feedback control, fine control, Flight, fluctuating asymmetry, fruit flies, Hermann J. Muller, Intelligent Design, jointed appendages, Marco Milán, muscular, natural selection, neurons, Nobel Prize, odors, ommatidia, PLOS Biology, reproduction, saccades, sharp turns, Stephen Crane, timing, visual system
Don’t swat too quickly! There’s more awe in that little fly than might be apparent from  a cursory glance. Source
Read More

Game Over? Nick Lane Wants Another Inning

acetyl phosphate, adenine, ATP synthase, baseball diamond, biology, Evolution, genetic information, gluconeogenesis, glycolysis, hydrothermal vents, Intelligent Design, John E. Walker, Krebs cycle, Lehigh University, metabolic process, Michael Behe, Miller-Urey experiment, Nick Lane, PLOS Biology, protocell, protometabolism, purine, referee, University College London, World Magazine
Michael Behe described how he attended a conference to hear Nobel laureate John Walker, the world’s expert on ATP synthase, explain how it might have evolved.  Source
Read More

How to Restore Science’s Lost Luster

Agnes Grudniewicz, arXiv, bioRxiv, C.S. Lewis, Charles Darwin: The Power of Place, Christian Reflections, Christos A. Ouzounis, consciousness, Cornell University, De Futilitate, Economics, EMBO Report, Evolution, evolutionary anthropology, Francis Bacon, high school, history, information ecosystem, integrity, Intelligent Design, J.P. Moreland, Janet Browne, Jay Richards, Jennifer Allen, journals, laymen, March for Science, morality, Nature (journal), pandemic, peer-review, philosophy, PLOS Biology, Politicians, predatory journals, quantum chromodynamics, Science Advances, Science and Scientism, scientific conferences, scientific meetings, scientific method, scientism, scientists, Stephen Meyer, Tom Coburn, universe, Wastebook, Westworld, World War II, X Club
Scientists used to be among the most trusted individuals in society. The white lab coat marked an individual who was highly trained, very intelligent, and ultimately credible. Changes in the last century have cast severe doubt on that picture — and scientific organizations sometimes admit it themselves. Some are very worried about loss of public trust in their “expert” opinions. They should be worried. In his book Science and Scientism, J.P. Moreland helps put scientists in their place, as did C.S. Lewis before him. Moreland loves science. He trusts much of what scientists say. But he demonstrates that scientism is not credible, because it refutes itself. Many important fields of inquiry, he writes, are off-limits to science, and to the extent scientists invade areas outside their domain, their opinions have…
Read More